United States v. Cantrell’s Empirical Analysis
433 F.3d 1269 · 2006
Citation profile
134 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 428 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably United States v. Cooper (2006), United States v. Kristl (2006)
134 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. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on United States v. Booker · Williams v. United States · United States v. Ameline · United States v. Crosby · United States v. Crawford
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 428 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“harbor” as "to serve as, or provide, a place of protection to; shelter or house; conceal or hide”). 2 . As the majority notes, there is an intracir-cuit conflict regarding whether we review the district court’s application of the Guidelines to the facts of this case de novo or for an abuse of discretion. See maj. op. at 891 n. 11. I would affirm the district court under either standard. 3 . We follow "a two-step procedure for reviewing sentences imposed following the date the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Booker.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“As we have said, the Sentencing Commission remains in place, writing Guidelines, collecting information about actual district court sentencing decisions, undertaking research, and revising the Guidelines accordingly. The district courts, while not bound to apply the Guidelines, must consult those Guidelines and take them into account when sentencing. ’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ased on the defendant's role in the offense, decrease the offense level as follows: (a) If the defendant was a minimal participant in any criminal activity, decrease by 4 levels. (b) If the defendant was a minor participant in any criminal activity, decrease by 2 levels. In cases falling between (a) and (b), decrease by 3 levels.”
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.