Flores v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
350 F.3d 666 · 2003
Citation profile
49 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 16 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Taylor v. United States · United States v. Mead Corp. · United States v. Caceres · Adams Fruit Co. v. Barrett · Deboris Calcano-Martinezs v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(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.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he court in Flores defined physical force to mean force that is 'intended to cause bodily injury, or at a minimum likely to do so.' Vail-Bailon concedes that neither part of his proposed definition is consistent with Curtis-Johnson . That is, the Supreme Court did not identify intent to cause injury as a relevant consideration, and it spoke of force that is capable of causing pain or injury rather than just injury.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“requirement, qualified as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16 (a), which requires that an offense have”
2 later decisions 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.