Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 643 F.2d 911 - McClain v. United States

McClain v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

643 F.2d 911 · 1981

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
1
states following
November 2000
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently November 2000 · most notably United States v. Thomas (1985), United States v. Andersson (1987)

34 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

260198119902000decided

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. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2106

Relies on Linkletter v. Walker · Hill v. United States · United States v. DiFrancesco · Davis v. United States · Simpson 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In its opinion our Circuit Court reasoned: If we vacate appellant’s entire sentence and remand for sentencing on only the section 2113(d) charge, the district court may or may not increase the fifteen-year sentence already imposed.. If the District Court intends to consider the imposition of an increased sentence, it should afford an opportunity to have the propriety of such an increase briefed and argued; if such an increase is imposed, its propriety will of course be subject to consideration in this Court upon appeal. See Busic v. United States, supra, 446 U.S. [398] at 412 n.19, 100 S.Ct. [1747] at 1756 n.19, [ 64 L.Ed.2d 381 ]. We limit our decision on this appeal to holding that we may vacate appellant’s entire sentence under the general supervisory powers granted us by 28 U.S.C. § 2106 . See Johnson v. United States, 619 F.2d 366, 368-69 (5th Cir. 1980); United States v. Moore, 540 F.2d 1088, 1091 (D.C.Cir.1976); Kitt v. United States, 138 F.2d 842, 843 (4th Cir. 1943); Phillips v. Biddle, 15 F.2d 40, 41 (8th Cir. 1926).”
    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.