United States v. Cambra’s Empirical Analysis
933 F.2d 752 · 1991
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably United States v. Hopper (1999), United States v. Arlen (1991)
40 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 333 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on Bifulco v. United States · Foy v. Northeast Suburban Life · Ladner v. United States · Duckworth v. Eagan · United States v. Lockard
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“establish immutably the exclusive list of available guidelines for given offenses,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the guideline section most applicable to the nature of the offense conduct charged in the count of which the defendant was convicted,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“specifies the guideline section or sections ordinarily applicable to the statute of conviction.”
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.