United States v. Irving Lamar Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
26 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably United States v. Gibson (2006), United States v. Lambert (1993)
26 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. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 28 U.S.C. § 994
Relies on United States v. Fayette
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In considering a departure under this provision, the Commission intends that the court use, as a reference, the guideline range for a defendant with a higher or lower criminal history category, as applicable. For example, if the court concludes that the defendant’s criminal history category of III significantly under-represents the seriousness of the defendant's criminal history, and that the seriousness of the defendant's criminal history most closely resembles that of most defendants with Criminal History Category IV, the court should look to the guideline range specified for a defendant with Criminal History Category IV to guide its departure.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he court must look first to the next criminal history category. If that category adequately reflects the defendant’s past- conduct, then the eourt must state its findings and sentence the defendant within the range for the new category. “If, on the other hand, the eourt decides that this new category is still inadequate to reflect the defendant’s criminal history, the court must look to the next highest category and repeat its inquiry.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“egregious, serious criminal record in which even the guideline range for a Category VI criminal history is not adequate to reflect the seriousness”
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.