United States v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
845 F.2d 94 · 1988
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States v. Munoz-Flores (1988), United States v. Teran (1996)
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 13 (Assimilative Crimes Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3013 · 18 U.S.C. § 661 · 42 U.S.C. § 10601 (Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 1996)
Relies on Williams v. United States · 103 S. Ct. 247 - Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc. v. United States · United States v. Sharpnack · Poythress v. Duncan · United States v. Press Publishing Co.
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“on the principle that state laws should be assimilated through the ACA in light of federal policy concerns.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“New section 3013(d) clarifies that judges must impose a special assessment upon persons convicted of an offense under the Assimilative Crimes Act. 21 Section 3013 currently requires the court to impose a special assessment upon any person convicted of a federal offense. Several courts have held that special assessments are not applicable to convictions under the Assimilative Crimes Act. 22 Because the Committee sees no reason to distinguish, for purposes of special assessments, convictions under the Assimilative Crimes Act from convictions under other provisions of Federal law, new section 3013(d) overturns those decisions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whoever within or upon [federal property] is guilty of any act of omission which, although not made punishable by any enactment of Congress, would be punishable if committed or omitted within the jurisdiction of the State ... in which such place is situated, by the laws thereof in force at the time of such act or omission, shall be guilty of a like offense and subject to a like punishment.”
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.