In re Smith’s Empirical Analysis
829 F.3d 1276 · 2016
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 2119 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Welch v. United States · Holloway v. United States · Jordan v. Secretary · In re Holladay
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an element requiring that one take or attempt to take by force and violence or by intimidation, which is what the federal carjacking statute does, satisfies the force clause of § 924(c).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“by force and violence, or by intimidation”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, or B) that by its ñatee, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
2 later decisions 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.