Rendon v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.3d 466 · 2015
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Taylor v. United States · Shepard v. United States · Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc. · Agostini v. Felton Chancellor Board of Education of the City of New York · Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the sole and limited purpose of determining whether [the listed items are] element[s] of the offense.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[a]ll those decisions rested on the explicit premise that the laws contain[ed] statutory phrases that cover several different crimes, not several different methods of committing one offense”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[W]e can see no real-world reason to worry”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.