United States v. Benitez’s Empirical Analysis
92 F.3d 528 · 1996
Citation profile
31 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably United States v. Brooks (1997), United States v. McClellan (1999)
31 federal appellate ·
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 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Olano · Griffin v. California · Darden v. Wainwright · Sorrells v. United States · United States v. Hasting
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n appellate court can affirm the determination of a sentencing range on any ground supported by the record even if that ground was not relied upon by the district court[,] [as long as] ... the district court has not relied on [an] improper factor ... in a but-for outcome-determinative sense.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to refer to the defendant's silence. However, the remark can be construed as an indirect comment on the defendant's failure to testify on his own behalf, or, at the very least, as a statement that the jury could only interpret as a comment on the defendant's silence. We shall assume, therefore, that the admission of the agent's testimony was in fact erroneous. However, to succeed on his claim, Mr. Herriman must establish that the testimony”
1 later decision 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.