United States v. Eason’s Empirical Analysis
829 F.3d 633 · 2016
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Arkansas Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Taylor v. United States · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Johnson v. United States
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“After Johnson , [the Arkansas definition of physical force], on its face, falls short of requiring force capable of causing physical pain or injury to another person.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“But Eason considered a different question than presented here. There, the court considered whether Arkansas robbery was a violent felony under the force clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e). Because the Arkansas Supreme Court previously had upheld a robbery conviction”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to the level of physical force required to establish a crime of violence for ACCA purposes.”
2 later decisions 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.