United States v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
739 F.3d 843 · 2014
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. · United States v. Mergerson · United States v. Munoz · United States v. Wilson · United States v. Sanchez
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Smith asks that we instruct the district court to consider whether a new trial is warranted on grounds not previously raised. Smith, however, has shown no error or abuse of discretion in the district court’s adjudication of his motion for a new trial, and we find none in the record. Accordingly, we deny that request. Consequently, and for the reasons stated herein, we REVERSE the judgment of acquittal and remand for sentencing. 18”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“When illegal files are recovered from shared computers, courts permit an inference of constructive possession where the files' nature and location are such that [the] computer's owner must be aware of them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Such an inference, however, must be supported by evidence that 'the defendant had knowledge of and access to' the files.”
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.