United States v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
780 F.3d 458 · 2015
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 926 · 18 U.S.C. § 1112 · 18 U.S.C. § 1363 · 18 U.S.C. § 35 · 18 U.S.C. § 81 · 49 U.S.C. § 46302 · 49 U.S.C. § 46507
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Williams v. Taylor · Kotteakos v. United States · Neder v. United States · Morissette v. United States
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e consider de novo whether an instruction embodied an error of law, but we review for abuse of discretion whether the instructions adequately explained the law or whether they tended to confuse or mislead the jury on the controlling issues.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“when Congress uses a common law term and does not otherwise define it, it is presumed that Congress intended to adopt the common law definition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them.”
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.