United States v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis
522 F.3d 710 · 2008
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5845 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)
Relies on United States v. Olano · United States v. Lopez · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · United States v. Atkinson · Staples v. United States
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The use of CDs was simply a practical solution to the technical challenge of enabling the jury to play the digital recordings. As we have said in response to objections to the presence of tape players in the jury room, "[aln audio exhibit should not be relegated to muteness because it can be perused only through the use of a tape player." The same principle holds true for digitally recorded audio exhibits.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arlton v. Schraut“[aln audio exhibit should not be relegated to muteness because it can be perused only through the use of a tape player.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arlton v. Schraut“guns are a fungible commodity for which there was an established interstate market.”
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.