United States v. Husmann’s Empirical Analysis
765 F.3d 169 · 2014
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1466A · 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2252 · 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 841 (Amendments of 1973 to Federal Law) · 21 U.S.C. § 802 (§ 102 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Puckett v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Sullivan v. Louisiana · Robinson v. Shell Oil Co. · New York v. Ferber
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in accordance with its ordinary meaning.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Distribution” under § 2G2.2(b)(3) extends to such acts as “possession with intent to distribute, production, advertisement, and transportation, related to the transfer of material involving the sexual exploitation of a minor.” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2G2.2 app. n. 1. In fact, “any act ,.. related to the transfer of material involving the sexual exploitation of a minor” qualifies as “distribution” under § 2G2.2(b)(3). Id. (emphasis added). •”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a 'word must not be read in isolation but instead [is] defined by reference to its statutory context.'”
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.