United States v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis
41 F.3d 361 · 1994
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 94 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2012 · most notably Jones v. United States (2000), United States v. McVeigh (1998)
79 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 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 844
Relies on United States v. Olano · United States v. Young · Sandstrom v. Montana · Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · United States v. Atkinson
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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if [the jurisdictional] element is not satisfied, then [defendant] is not guilty; but the court is not by the failure of proof on that element deprived of judicial jurisdiction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have not ruled on whether receiving out-of-state natural gas by itself satisfies section 844(i)’s interstate commerce requirement. In Hansen [ 755 F.2d 629 (8th Cir.1985)] we indicated that reliance on the use of electricity transported through interstate commerce to confer jurisdiction “would seem to stretch the notion of interstate commerce beyond the limits of logic.” * * * Hansen , however, was decided before the Russell [ 471 U.S. 858 , 105 S.Ct. 2455 , 85 L.Ed.2d 829 (1985) ] Court’s recognition of the sweeping jurisdictional scope of the statute.”
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.