United States v. Sheets’s Empirical Analysis
814 F.3d 256 · 2016
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3612 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3664 · 18 U.S.C. § 3771 · 18 U.S.C. § 4 · 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act)
Relies on Johnson v. United States · 134 S. Ct. 1710 - Paroline v. United States · United States v. Scott · United States v. Ollison · United States v. Diaz
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must assess as best it can from available evidence the significance of the individual defendant's conduct in light of the broader causal process that produced the victim's losses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Paroline solely involves the issue of whether restitution may be imposed under the circumstances of that case . . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“review[s] the propriety of a particular [restitution] award for an abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.