Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 608 F.2d 722 - United States v. Wray

United States v. Wray’s Empirical Analysis

608 F.2d 722 · 1979

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2020

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

150197919801990200020102020decided

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. § 4082 · 18 U.S.C. § 751 · 26 U.S.C. § 5681

Relies on Weatherford v. Bursey · Johnston v. United States · United States v. Arteaga-Limones · Evans 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A majority of criminal statutes proscribe only affirmative conduct — the doing of a particular act. Under such a statute, the district in which the criminal act was actually performed by the defendant is ordinarily the district in which the offense was committed. Venue therefore would be proper in any district where such affirmative conduct occurred. [Citations omitted.] A few statutes, however, provide criminal penalties, not for affirmative conduct, but rather for the failure to do a particular act. In such an instance, proper venue, the place where the offense was committed, is the district in which the required act should have been done. [Citations omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The willful failure of a prisoner to remain within the extended limits of his confinement, or to return within the time prescribed to an institution or facility designated by the Attorney General, shall be deemed an escape from the custody of the Attorney General punishable as provided in chapter 35 of this title.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the equivalent of a formal bench adjudication ... [in which a judge] applies the applicable law to determine whether the facts before him constitute a criminal offense,”
    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.