Moncrieffe v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
569 U.S. 184 · 2013
Citation profile
128 federal appellate · 20 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 463 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2025 · most notably Sessions v. Dimaya (2018), 139 S. Ct. 2319 - United States v. Davis (2019)
128 federal appellate · 20 district · 9 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3559 · 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 844 (§ 404 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 885 (§ 515 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Taylor v. United States · Shepard v. United States · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Padilla v. Kentucky
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 463 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'presume that the conviction rested upon nothing more than the least of the acts criminalized' under the state statute.”
33 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“focus on the minimum conduct criminalized by the state statute is not an invitation to apply 'legal imagination' to the state offense.”
31 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under this approach we look 'not to the facts of the particular prior case,' but instead to whether 'the state statute defining the crime of conviction' categorically fits within the 'generic' federal definition of a corresponding aggravated felony.”
14 later decisions 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.