United States v. Figaro’s Empirical Analysis
935 F.2d 4 · 1991
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (§ 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Nicholas v. United States · United States v. Diaz-Villafane · United States v. Sklar · United States v. Harotunian · United States v. Ocasio
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our framework for reviewing upward departures under the sentencing guidelines is well settled. First, we undertake de novo review of the correctness of the district court’s determination that the relevant circumstances were sufficiently ‘unusual’ to warrant departure. Second, all findings of fact material to the challenged departure are reviewed for clear error. Third, we accord considerable deference to the decision of the district court in our review of the reasonableness of the degree of departure, which is ‘quintessentially a judgment call’ for the district court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy”
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.