Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 606 F.2d 871 - United States v. Pruner

United States v. Pruner’s Empirical Analysis

606 F.2d 871 · 1979

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Rehaif v. United States (2019), United States v. Langley (1995)

23 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

16019791980199020002010decided

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. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)

Relies on Adams v. Williams · Morissette v. United States · United States v. Batchelder · United States v. Freed · United States v. Balint

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

  1. “[T]he 1968 Act reflects a ... concern with keeping firearms out of the hands of categories of potentially irresponsible persons, including convicted felons. Its broadly stated principal purpose was “to make it possible to keep firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetency.” S.Rep. No. 1501, 90th Cong., 2d Sess., 22 (1968), 1968 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2112, 2113. See also 114 Cong. Rec. 13219 (1968) (remarks by Sen. Tydings); Huddleston v. United States, 415 U.S. [814] at 824-825, 94 S.Ct. 1262 , 39 L.Ed.2d 782 ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It may be true that the purchase of handguns in itself is an innocent act and that because of the innocence of the act there exists the possibility of injustice to one who purchases a gun, unaware that he had committed a crime that was punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year. However, we believe that the potential for such injustice is outweighed by the danger created if guns are al lowed to fall into the hands of dangerous persons such as felons.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “we look to state law solely to determine whether the maximum permissible prison term exceeds one year,”
    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.