United States v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
821 F.3d 562 · 2016
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252 · 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3583 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Olano · Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. · Young v. United States · Henderson v. United States · United States v. John
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“significant procedural error such as improperly calculating the Sentencing Guidelines range.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“using a two-step abuse-of-discretion standard.”
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.