United States v. Lopez’s Empirical Analysis
100 F.3d 98 · 1996
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 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) · 28 U.S.C. § 2106
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Chapman v. State of California · Pinkerton v. United States · Bailey v. United States · Carella v. California
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we conclude that the error was harmless. Given the undisputed evidence that Pitts carried the handbag containing the firearm during the drug transaction, no rational jury could have found that the gun was not available to Pitts without necessarily finding that she at least”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“jury instruction. 3 7 AFFIRMED. ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, appellant's request for oral argument is denied * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3 1 Because there is sufficient evidence to support a conviction under the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Therefore, we hold that the error in the jury instructions with respect to section 924(c)'s”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.