United States v. Reddick’s Empirical Analysis
203 F.3d 767 · 2000
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably United States v. Napier (2000), United States v. Hancock (2000)
13 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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
Relies on Cheek v. United States · Lambert v. People of the State of California · Bryan v. United States · McGee v. County of Orange · Holsey v. Director of Classification for Division of Corrections
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (8) who is subject to a court order that— (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate; (B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and (C) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; [ ] to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We agree with every circuit court that has considered due process challenges to § 922(g)(8) and conclude that due process does not require actual knowledge of the federal statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Like a felon, a person [subject to a domestic violence protection order] cannot reasonably expect to be free from regulation when possessing a firearm”
1 later decision 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.