United States v. Martinez’s Empirical Analysis
821 F.3d 984 · 2016
Citation profile
12 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 28 U.S.C. § 2106
Relies on Gall v. United States · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Descamps v. United States · United States v. Feemster · United States v. Pirani
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“when the district court indicates it would have alternatively imposed the same sentence even if a lower guideline range applied.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An incorrect Guidelines calculation is harmless error where the district court specifies [that] the resolution of a particular issue did not affect the ultimate determination of a sentence. ... While in some cases a court sentencing a defendant under an incorrect Guidelines range may require remand without any further showing of prejudice, when a district court's detailed explanation for the sentence imposed makes clear that the judge based the sentence he or she selected on factors independent of the Guidelines, the error may be harmless.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hile a district court may consider factors already taken into account in the guideline range, 'substantial variances based upon factors already taken into account in a defendant's guidelines sentencing range seriously undermine sentencing uniformity.'”
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.