v. Viburg’s Empirical Analysis
2020
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1325 (§ 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Blakely v. Washington · Jones v. United States · 139 S. Ct. 2319 - United States v. Davis · United States Ex Pel Attorney General of the United States v. Delaware & Hudson Company Same
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“but it is a class 4 felony if the violation occurred after three or more prior convictions, arising out of separate and distinct criminal episodes,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“must be proved to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.