United States v. Fawbush’s Empirical Analysis
946 F.2d 584 · 1991
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably United States v. Anderson (1993), United States v. Bond (1994)
39 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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. § 13 (Assimilative Crimes Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553
Relies on United States v. Zamarripa · United States v. Ellis · United States v. Onwuemene · United States v. Perkins
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a victim or victims suffered psychological injury much more serious than that normally resulting from commission of the offense....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“prior similar adult criminal conduct not resulting in a criminal conviction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Departures are appropriate if the sentencing court finds that there exists an aggravating or mitigating circumstance “of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines that, in order to advance the objectives set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a)(2), should result in a sentence different from that described.” USSG § 5K2.0. The guidelines provide that sentencing courts [are] to treat each guideline as carving out a “heartland,” a set of typical cases embodying the conduct that each guideline describes. When a court finds an atypical case, one to which a particular guideline linguistically applies but where conduct significantly differs from the norm, a court may consider whether a departure is warranted. USSG § 1A1.1, cmt. (n. 4(b)).”
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.