Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 528 F.3d 86 - United States v. Boardman

United States v. Boardman’s Empirical Analysis

528 F.3d 86 · 2008

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
September 2015
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Kimbrough v. United States · In re Miller · United States v. Jiménez-Beltre · In re Miller · United States v. Fiore

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “inquired extensively and repeatedly about Carr’s culpability for the murder. [Aug. Tr.] at 16 (“Let’s talk about the question of culpability”); [Aug. Tr.] at 16-17 (court notes that this murder was not premeditated); [Aug. Tr.] at 21 (court finds that killing was “on the spot”); [Aug. Tr.] at 27 (“[T]he degree of culpability is important, and this is not something that is listed in some numerical list in the guidelines.”); [S.Tr. 18] (“I have been very concerned to assess the degree of culpability in the shooting.”). The court’s inquiries and statements at the sentencing hearing suggest that it disagreed with this Court’s interpretation of the Guidelines, but felt itself bound — as it was at that point by this Court’s jurisprudence — to use the first degree murder guideline as its baseline for determining sentence. However, in light of Kimbrough, disagreement with the Commission’s policy judgment (as interpreted by this Court in Minicone and Carr[ I]) is a permissible reason to deviate from the guideline.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “may not categorically reject the crack/powdered cocaine differential as a matter of policy”); United States v. Boardman, 528 F.3d 86, 87 (1st Cir.2008) ("[B]ecause [the district court] has broader freedom that it did before Kim-brough and there is some explicit indication that it might well alter its sentence in light of that, we think a remand is warranted to permit the court to make its own decision now informed by Kimbrough.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “consider [sentencing] issues with the additional latitude furnished by Kimbrough”
    1 later decision 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.