United States v. Alphas’s Empirical Analysis
785 F.3d 775 · 2015
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 3143 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 18 U.S.C. § 3663 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2514 · 5 U.S.C. § 8148
Relies on Gall v. United States · Williams v. United States · 134 S. Ct. 881 - Burrage v. United States · United States v. Rodriguez · United States v. Smith
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.
“a reasonable determination of appropriate restitution by resolving uncertainties with a view towards achieving fairness to the victim,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]ctual loss is widely (and correctly) thought to be limited to pecuniary harm that would not have occurred but for the defendant's criminal activity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an appellate court may only deem such an error harmless 'if, after reviewing the entire record, it is sure that the error did not affect the sentence imposed.'”
3 later decisions 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.