United States v. May’s Empirical Analysis
413 F.3d 841 · 2005
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably United States v. Soldier (2005), United States v. Leahy (2006)
31 federal appellate · 2 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. § 113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Booker · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Blakely v. Washington · Johnson v. United States · United States v. Pirani
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[S]everal circuits have affirmatively rejected the notion that Apprendi, Blakely, or Booker affect the manner in which findings of restitution can be made .... These cases are persuasive.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“so that the objections can be addressed and investigated prior to the sentencing hearing.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The district court has no obligation to consider an objection to the presentence report that is untimely because it is raised for the first time at sentencing.”
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.