Douglas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
858 F.3d 1069 · 2017
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 16 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Leocal v. Ashcroft · 135 S. Ct. 2551 - Johnson v. United States · Granberry v. Greer · 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The invocation of § 2255. is problematic. Douglas treats ... [Johnson] as opening to collateral review all sentences under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Yet the Court did not hold the Act invalid; [Johnson] concerns only a part of § 924(e)(2) (B) (ii). The elements clause in § 924(e)(2)(B)(i) remains in effect, as does the burglary clause in § 924(e) (2) (B) (ii).... The district court concluded that Douglas’s prior convictions are violent felonies under the elements clause of § 924(e)(2)(B)®, so [Johnson], does not affect his situation.”
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.