United States v. Lamb’s Empirical Analysis
74 F.3d 751 · 1996
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
June 2009
most recently cited
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Bailey v. United States · United States v. Jackson
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The [Supreme] Court ... explain[ed] that the situation 'where an offender conceals a gun nearby to be at the ready for an imminent confrontation' does not constitute active employment. Rather, active employment connotes activities such as 'brandishing, displaying, bartering, striking with, and most obviously, firing or attempting to fire, a firearm.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he government put forth no evidence that the firearm was ever actively employed as an 'operative factor' in any of the drug transactions that formed the basis of the conspiracy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nder the Supreme Court's formulation, it is clear that [Ruby] Lamb's conviction for § 924(c)(1) cannot stand.”
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.