Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 76 F.3d 320 - United States v. Bailey

United States v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis

76 F.3d 320 · 1996

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
January 2021
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently January 2021

13 federal appellate · 1 district ·

901996200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3624 · 28 U.S.C. § 1863 · 28 U.S.C. § 1867

Relies on United States v. John E. Test, Francis R. Salazar v. United States of America, United States of America v. Enrique Sandoval Chavez, United States of America v. Cameron David Bishop · United States v. Gregory · United States v. Bearden · Anderson v. Commissioner · United States v. Barnette

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

  1. “To the extent that [Royal's] contentions rest on statutory interpretations, we review the district court's denial of [Royal's] motion de novo. . . . The district court's factual findings, however, will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “runs concurrently with any Federal, State, or local term of probation or supervised release or parole for another offense to which the person is subject during the supervised release.”
    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.