United States v. Ruff’s Empirical Analysis
535 F.3d 999 · 2008
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently March 2025
12 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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. § 1347 (§ 242 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 669 (§ 243 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Gall v. United States · United States v. Carty · United States v. Pauley · United States v. Martin · United States v. Stoterau
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 clear message in Gall ... is that we must defer “to the District Court’s reasoned and reasonable decision that the § 3553(a) factors, on the whole, justified the sentence.” Gall happened to discuss postcrime maturation and self-rehabilitation because they were the basis of the district court’s reasoned decision in that ease, but it is the reasoned decision itself, not the specific reasons that are cited, that triggers our duty to defer.”
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.