United States v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
848 F.3d 1274 · 2017
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (§ 902 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3663A (§ 204 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 46
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Pinkerton v. United States · Grupo Mexicano Desarrollos v. Alliance Bond Fund Inc · Dennis v. Dennis · Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) error, (2) that is plain, which (3) affects substantial rights, and which (4) seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Plain error affects a defendant’s substantial rights if there is a reasonable probability that, but for the error claimed, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.”
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.