United States v. Guy’s Empirical Analysis
924 F.2d 702 · 1991
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably United States v. Flores (1995), United States v. Hatchett (1994)
36 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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. § 2113
Relies on Taylor v. Louisiana · Duren v. Missouri · Strauder v. West Virginia · Rosales-Lopez v. United States · Baltimore City Department of Social Services v. Bouknight
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) that the group alleged to be excluded is a “distinctive” group in the community, (2) that the representation of this group in the venires from which the juries are selected is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; and (3) that this underrepresentation must be due to the systematic exclusion of this group in the jury-selection process.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“group in the community, Davis has failed to make the other two showings required by Duren. 10 There is no evidence in the record concerning the racial composition of the area from which jurors are drawn nor of the jury venire. 11 Davis has also failed to show that any underrepresentation of blacks, assuming it occurred, was due to their systematic exclusion in the jury selection process. In response to a motion by Davis to explain its jury selection process, the government tendered the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“had committed himself to an enduring series of criminal acts, sufficient to establish a 'pattern' . . . . " 34 We believe the acts of the defendants are similar to those presented in these cases. The manner in which they engaged in the kidnappings was capable of indefinite repetition so long as the others in El Paso ordered them to enforce the collection of outstanding drug debts. The equipment, firearms and other evidence found at the apartment and house, as well as the manner in which they performed the acts of kidnapping demonstrate that the defendants had also committed themselves to a series of criminal activities. The only reason their scheme ended was because they were caught. We will not reward them by precluding the government from establishing a RICO pattern because of the quick success of law enforcement officials. Our review clearly shows that the government presented sufficient facts to support the jury's findings of the existence of a pattern of racketeering. 35 Therefore, the indictment was sufficient to sustain the conviction, and sufficient facts exist in the record to support the jury's ultimate conviction. B. The Voir Dire 36 The second major challenge the defendants raise in regard to their conviction involves the manner in which the district court conducted the voir dire. The district court has "broad discretion in determining how best to conduct the voir dire.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.