Moore v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
871 F.3d 72 · 2017
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Booker · Teague v. Lane · Kimbrough v. United States · Bousley v. United States · Dillon 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“because it recognizes that the Supreme Court guides lower courts not just with technical holdings but with general rules that are logically inherent in those holdings ....”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a straightforward application of Johnson II”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.