United States v. Meadows’s Empirical Analysis
866 F.3d 913 · 2017
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 1348 (§ 807 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 1957 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553
Relies on Gall v. United States · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Zandford · United States v. Naftalin · Pepper v. United States · Pepper 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“involved sophisticated means and the defendant intentionally engaged in or caused the conduct constituting sophisticated means.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“especially complex or especially intricate offense conduct pertaining to the execution or concealment of an offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“offense conduct, viewed as a whole, was notably more intricate than that of the garden-variety [offense]”
2 later decisions 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.