United States v. Lowe’s Empirical Analysis
860 F.2d 1370 · 1988
Citation profile
78 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably United States v. McNeese (1990), United States v. Buggs (1990)
78 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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. § 1202 · 18 U.S.C. § 3573 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 849 (§ 409 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Hamling v. United States · Mullaney v. Wilbur · United States v. Turkette · Russello 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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“In fact, the only perceptible difference between [§ 1202(a)(1) ] and a more traditional recidivist statute is Congress’ conclusion that a certain class of repeat felons should be subject to an enhanced sentence when they commit the prohibited act of ... possessing a firearm, rather than the same underlying offense or offenses. Significantly, the legislative history of the ACCA reveals that the difference was intended and is a function of Congress’ aim of subjecting “career criminals” — that small number of repeat offenders responsible for an inordinate percentage of the nation’s 25 million crimes of theft and violence — to federal prosecution without radically expanding federal jurisdiction over common law crimes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under Rule 7(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a miscitation such as the reference to § 924(e) is harmless error and cannot be grounds for dismissing the indictment or reversing the conviction unless the defendant is misled by the erroneous reference and prejudiced thereby. United States v. Hutcheson, 312 U.S. 219 , 229, 61 S.Ct. 463 , 464, 85 L.Ed. 788 (1941); United States v. Garner, 529 F.2d 962 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 922 , 96 S.Ct. 2630 , 49 L.Ed.2d 376 (1976). It is apparent from the content of Lowe’s numerous pretrial motions that the indictment created no such notice problem for him or his counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.