United States v. Delpit’s Empirical Analysis
94 F.3d 1134 · 1996
Citation profile
133 federal appellate · 4 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 182 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Gibbs (1999), United States v. Allen (2001)
133 federal appellate · 4 district · 11 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. § 1029 · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 1958 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Bailey v. United States · Engle v. Isaac · Pereira v. United States · Zafiro v. United States · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co.
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 182 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is no more reason to expect unassisted jurors to understand drug dealers' cryptic slang than antitrust theory or asbestosis.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[The statute] does not prohibit murder or attempted murder. Instead, it outlaws us ing interstate commerce facilities with the intent that murder-for-hire be committed. Once the interstate commerce facility is used with the required intent the crime is complete. One who travels or causes another to travel in interstate commerce with the necessary murderous intent need not do anything else to violate the statute.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“ ‘point the finger,’ to shift the blame, or to save himself at the expense of the other,”
3 later decisions 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.