Sandoval v. Sessions’s Empirical Analysis
866 F.3d 986 · 2017
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3559 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 802 (§ 102 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Shepard v. United States · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Ventura · Descamps v. United States · Lopez v. Gonzales · GLK, Inc. 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“offering to deliver a controlled substance does not cross the line between preparation and attempt for the purposes of the [federal] Controlled Substances Act.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We owe no deference to the decision of the BIA on [divisibility] and there is no reason to remand for the BIA to decide the issue of divisibility in the first instance.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Barbosa v. Barr · Barbosa v. Barr“Although [it may be] strongly corroborative of intent to commit a crime,”
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.