United States v. Bonds’s Empirical Analysis
933 F.2d 152 · 1991
Citation profile
44 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably United States v. Munoz (1998), United States v. Shonubi (1993)
44 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 18 U.S.C. § 1621 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 472
Relies on United States v. Grayson · Bronston v. United States · United States v. Stroud · United States v. Thomas · United States v. Perdomo
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[wjhere ... the defendant’s testimony relates to an essential element of his offense, such as his state of mind ..., the judgment of conviction'necessarily constitutes a finding that the contested testimony was false. Accordingly, assuming that the evidence also persuades the sentencing judge that the defendant knew, at the time of testifying, that the statements to which he testified were untrue, a section 3C1.1 en-haneement'would be appropriate.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[B]y finding [the defendant] guilty of knowingly distributing counterfeit money, the jury necessarily determined that [he] knew that the money he had distributed was counterfeit — that is, unless the jury’s verdict was unsupported by the evidence, in which case, of course, the remedy would be to reverse [his] conviction, not simply to disallow the two-level upgrade in sentencing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Conduct resulting in an enhancement under Sec. 3C1.1 (Obstructing or Impeding the Administration of Justice) ordinarily indicates that the defendant has not accepted responsibility for his criminal conduct.”
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.