United States v. LaCoste’s Empirical Analysis
821 F.3d 1187 · 2016
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3563 · 18 U.S.C. § 3583
Relies on United States v. Olano · United States v. Watson · United States v. Rearden · United States v. Sofsky · United States v. Daniels
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a total ban on Internet use is improper but a more narrowly tailored restriction would be justified, the solution is to have the district court itself fashion the terms of that narrower restriction. Imposing a total ban and transferring open-ended discretion to the probation officer to authorize needed exceptions is not a permissible alternative.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[C]ourts have upheld conditions prohibiting all use of the Internet only in limited circumstances. Thus far, such conditions have been permitted in one of two scenarios: when use of the Internet was 'essential' or 'integral' to the offense of conviction, or when ... the defendant had a history of using the Internet to commit other offenses. 32”
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.