United States v. Ward’s Empirical Analysis
732 F.3d 175 · 2013
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2252 · 18 U.S.C. § 2259 (§ 40113 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3572 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742
Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Rita v. United States · Sells v. United States · Blackledge v. Allison · Estes v. Texas
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the defendant's right of allocution is not unlimited” and that”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“1) to allow the defendant to present mitigating circumstances, 2) to permit the defendant to present personal characteristics to enable the sentencing court to craft an individualized sentence, and (3) to preserve the appearance of fairness in the criminal justice system.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“has value in terms of maximizing the perceived equity of the process, because the defendant is given the right to speak on any subject of his choosing prior to the imposition of sentence.”
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.