United States v. Coplin-Benjamin’s Empirical Analysis
2023
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 963
Relies on Gall v. United States · United States v. Zannino · United States v. Turbides-Leonardo · United States v. Casas · United States v. Dávila-González
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hen a defendant has identified potentially mitigating sentencing factors and those factors are thoroughly debated at sentencing, the fact that the court did not explicitly mention them during the sentencing hearing suggests they were unconvincing, not ignored.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] sentencing court is not required to address frontally every argument advanced by the parties, nor need it dissect every factor made relevant by 18 U.S.C. § 3553 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where 'material differences between the defendant and the proposed comparator suffice to explain the divergence,' a sentencing disparity claim is unlikely to prevail.”
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.