Licon v. Ledezma’s Empirical Analysis
638 F.3d 1303 · 2011
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3621 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States · Auer v. Robbins · National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n the correctional experience of the Bureau, the offense conduct of both armed offenders and certain recidivists suggests that they pose a particular risk to the public.... The Bureau recognizes that there is a significant potential for violence from criminals who carry, possess or use firearms while engaged in felonious activity. Thus, in the interest of public safety, these inmates should not be released months in advance of completing their sentences.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] petition under ... § 2241 attacks the execution of a sentence rather than its validity.” Licon v. Ledezma, 638 F.3d 1303, 1311 (10th Cir.2011) (quoting Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir.1996)) (internal quotation marks omitted). And thus where a petitioner”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Faine v. Jones
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.