United States v. Mathis’s Empirical Analysis
767 F.3d 1264 · 2014
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 2260A · 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910 (Mann Act))
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Illinois v. Gates · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Crawford v. Washington · United States v. Leon
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“who employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any minor to engage in ... any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual depiction of such conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“direct[ing the minor] to take sexually explicit pictures”
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.