United States v. Barnes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate ·

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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “At issue, then, is what the Pepper Court intended by the term “de novo” in the re-sentencing context. [Petitioners] interpret the Court’s dicta that general remand orders “wipe the slate clean” as entitling them to present any and all new arguments at resentencing — regardless of their relevance to the error giving rise to the remand. [N]o court has concluded that Pepper operates to abolish waiver in the context of re-sentencing. As it discusses de novo re-sentencing, the Court emphasizes a district court’s ability to “effectuate its sentencing intent,” id. at 1251, underscoring its concern that re-sentencing courts should not be bound by their predecessors or rotely input the Courts of Appeals’ changes into their original sentencing calculations. Its holding thus stands for the proposition that general remands render a district court unconstrained by any element of the prior sentence. Id. Allowing a district court to freely balance already and properly raised arguments to preserve or revise its sentencing objectives does not equate to carte blanche for defendants to raise new arguments unrelated to the issues raised on appeal____ We, therefore, hold that when a case is generally remanded to the district court for re-sentencing, the district court may entertain new arguments as necessary to effectuate its sentencing intent, but it is not obligated to consider any new evidence or arguments beyond that relevant to the issues raised on appeal. Accordingly, the district court did”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Susi

2. “any issue that could have been raised on appeal but was not is waived and, therefore, not remanded”). 5 . United States v. Parker, 101 F.3d 527 , 528 (7th Cir.1996) (dismissing the defendant's second appeal because”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Pileggi

3. “[t]his Court’s decision to remand and our corresponding opinion dictate the scope of the remand.”) (citation omitted); United States v. Ben Zvi, 242 F.3d 89, 95 (2d Cir.2001) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. McMurrin