United States v. Quarrell’s Empirical Analysis
310 F.3d 664 · 2002
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably United States v. Harvey (2008), United States v. Wooten (2004)
61 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 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 Apprendi v. New Jersey · United States v. Dunnigan · Staples v. United States · United States v. Feola · Liparota v. United States
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When interpreting the language of a statute, the starting point is always the language of the statute itself. If the language is clear and unambiguous, the plain meaning of the statute controls. A statute is ambiguous when it is capable of being understood by reasonably well-informed persons in two or more different senses.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If [a statutory] ambiguity is found, a court may seek guidance from Congress's intent, a task aided by reviewing the legislative history. A court can also resolve ambiguities by looking at the purpose behind the statute.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(c)(1) ... in all sentencing proceedings for convictions for convictions of, or plea agreements relating to charges for, any offense— (A) that is— (i) a crime of violence, as defined in section 16; (ii) an offense against property under this title, or under section 416(a) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 856(a)), including any offense committed by fraud or deceit; or (iii) an offense described in section 1365 (relating to tampering with consumer products); and (B) in which an identifiable victim or victims has suffered a physical injury or pecuniary loss. (2) In the case of a plea agreement that does not result in a conviction for an offense described in paragraph (1), this section shall apply only if the plea specifically states that an offense listed under such paragraph gave rise to the plea agreement.”
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.