United States v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
942 F.2d 1125 · 1991
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Powell (1991), United States v. Doyle (1997)
40 federal appellate · 6 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. § 3143 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 26 U.S.C. § 61 (Payment-in-Kind Tax Treatment Act of 1983) · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7203
Relies on Welch v. Helvering · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein D Stanton · Cheek v. United States · Kuntz v. City of Dayton · James v. United States
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“one. For the same reason, the finding here that such a challenge is not substantial also deserves deference. Based on our review of the parties' factual descriptions, and given the deference due at this stage of an appeal to the trial judge's first-hand evaluation of evidentiary sufficiency, we conclude that no substantial question in this regard has been presented. 2 9 Even if we were to reach the opposite conclusion, we would be loath to find that the district court abused its discretion in determining that defendant had not clearly shown”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Necessarily, a district court's thorough knowledge of the merits of a case puts it in a better position to evaluate petitions for release than our Court, at least until the issues have been fully presented to the Court through briefing and oral argument.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“defendants [in a tax case] . . . could not have ascertained the legal standards applicable to their conduct, criminal proceedings may not be used to define and punish an alleged failure to conform to those standards.”
2 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.