United States v. Mei-Fen Chen’s Empirical Analysis
913 F.2d 183 · 1990
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Forsyth v. Barr (1994), United States v. Lara-Velasquez (1990)
79 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1002 · 18 U.S.C. § 1158 · 18 U.S.C. § 1461 · 18 U.S.C. § 1722 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 853 (§ 413 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Perrin v. United States · Texas v. Louisiana · Weinberger v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc. · Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. City of Chicago
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 107 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“rent[ing], leas[ing], or ma[king] available for use, either with or without compensation, the building, room, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Except as authorized by this title, it shall be unlawful to— (1) knowingly open or maintain any place for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well established that a statute should be construed so that each of its provisions is given its full effect; interpretations which render parts of a statute inoperative or superfluous are to be avoided.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.