United States v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis
839 F.3d 94 · 2016
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 856 (§ 416 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Estelle v. Gamble · Kotteakos v. United States · Solem v. Helm · United States v. Cotton
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.
“[t]he proponent . . . must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the declarant and the defendant were members of a conspiracy when the statement was made, and that the statement was made in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A district court's determination 'as to whether this burden has been met is known in this circuit as a Petrozziello ruling,' after our holding in United States v. Petrozziello, 548 F.2d 20 (1st Cir. 1977).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“if it contains the elements of the offense charged, fairly informs the defendant of the charges against which he must defend, and enables him to enter a plea without fear of double jeopardy.”
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.