United States v. Cavanaugh’s Empirical Analysis
643 F.3d 592 · 2011
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 117 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 25 U.S.C. § 1302 (§ 202 of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968)
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Williams v. People of State of New York · United States v. Tucker
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Post-Nichols ... it is arguable that the fact of an actual constitutional violation is, perhaps, not only an important factor for determining when a prior conviction may be used for sentence enhancement purposes, but a required or controlling factor. It also seems clear that, where the subsequent use is to prove the actual elements of a criminal offense, Nichols is of questionable applicability, given that Court’s emphasis on the differences between sentencing and guilt determinations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.