Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 23 I&NDEC 766 - BRIEVA

BRIEVA’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
March 2022
most recently cited

16 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2022 · most notably Judulang v. Holder (2011), Judulang v. Holder (2011)

16 federal appellate ·

250200520102020decided

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. § 16 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Leocal v. Ashcroft · United States v. Velazquez-Overa · United States v. Charles · United States of America v. Jorge Hernandez-Avalos

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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, or (b) any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “for purposes of comparing the moral turpitude ground of inadmissibility. However, the respondent has not been charged with an aggravated felony”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “have an analogous ground of inadmissibility. Whether the respondent could be found inadmissible for a”
    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.