Carty v. Ashcroft’s Empirical Analysis
395 F.3d 1081 · 2005
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2024 · most notably Tijani v. Holder (2010), Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder (2009)
29 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 26 U.S.C. § 145 · 26 U.S.C. § 6653 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on United States v. Scharton · Wadman v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · United States v. Walton · Bloch v. United States · Huerta-Guevara v. Ashcroft
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Crimes of moral turpitude are of basically two types, those involving fraud and those involving grave acts of baseness or depravity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When a statute is divisible into several crimes, some of which may involve moral turpitude and some not, it is appropriate to examine the `record of conviction' to determine which part applies to the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“where the court found that willfully structuring transactions did not inherently involve fraud because it only deprived the government of information and did not obtain anything from the government,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Notash v. Gonzales
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.