United States v. Connell’s Empirical Analysis
960 F.2d 191 · 1992
Citation profile
155 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 204 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably United States v. Sepulveda (1993), United States v. Saccoccia (1995)
155 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 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. § 3553 · 31 U.S.C. § 5312 · 31 U.S.C. § 5324 (§ 1354 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986)
Relies on Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Kuntz v. City of Dayton · Latimer v. Stainer · City of El Centro v. United States · Fields v. Hartford Casualty Insurance 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 204 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[S]ting operations are designed to tempt the criminally inclined, and a well constructed sting is often sculpted to test the limits of the target's criminal inclinations. Courts should go very slowly before staking out rules that will deter government agents from the proper performance of their investigative duties.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a skill not possessed by members of the general public and usually requiring substantial education, training or licensing”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“used a special skill, in a manner that significantly facilitated the commission ... of the offense.”
5 later decisions 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.