United States v. Christman’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.3d 1110 · 2010
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252 · 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2253 · 18 U.S.C. § 2256 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553
Relies on Gall v. United States · Rita v. United States · Koon v. United States · Kimbrough v. United States · Sells 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection. The court, in determining the proper sentence to be imposed, shall consider— (1) the nature and characteristics of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed— (B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; (6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“sentence is substantively unreasonable if ‘the district court selects a sentence arbitrarily.’ ”
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.