United States v. Fields’s Empirical Analysis
516 F.3d 923 · 2008
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States v. Zuniga-Soto (2008), United States v. Caraway (2008)
22 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
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 16 U.S.C. § 480 · 16 U.S.C. § 551 (Wildfire Disaster Recovery Act of 1989) · 18 U.S.C. § 1111 · 18 U.S.C. § 13 (Assimilative Crimes Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3592 · 18 U.S.C. § 3593 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3595 (§ 60002 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)
Relies on Slack v. McDaniel · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Olano · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he intent and meaning of this provision being that the State wherein any such national forest is situated shall not, by reason of the establishment thereof, lose its jurisdiction, nor the inhabitants thereof their rights and privileges as citizens [of the State], or be absolved from their duties as citizens of the State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“indicates that the United States is being ceded full civil and criminal jurisdiction, with a concurrent jurisdiction reserved to the State”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a reasonable probability that, but for the error claimed, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
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.