In Re: Doe v.’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3563 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3771 · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on United States v. Blake · In re Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina · Kenna v. United States District Court for the Central District of California · In re Ralston Purina Co. · Docket No. 05-2619-Op(l)
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a mandamus petition [to a court of appeals] as the appropriate vehicle for appellate review of an order denying a crime victim's assertion of a right protected thereunder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Brown“is too attenuated to support application of [the VWPA]”
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.