United States v. Carmichael’s Empirical Analysis
343 F.3d 756 · 2003
Citation profile
14 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently June 2026 · most notably United States v. Riascos-Cuenu (2005), Kaemmerling v. Lappin (2008)
14 federal appellate ·
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. § 1467 · 18 U.S.C. § 3013 · 18 U.S.C. § 3554 · 18 U.S.C. § 3563 · 18 U.S.C. § 3626 (§ 20409 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3663 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 42 U.S.C. § 14132 (§ 210304 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)
Relies on V. C O Churner · Correction Officer Porters v. Ronald Nussle · Texas v. United States · McCarthy v. Bronson · United States v. Paul
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A claim is not ripe for review if `it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all.'”
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.