Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 885 F.3d 449 - United States v. Ryan

United States v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

885 F.3d 449 · 2018

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252

Relies on Molina-Martinez v. United States · United States v. Shaffer · United States v. Carani · United States v. Cureton · United States v. Volpentesta

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he government . . . presented evidence of [defendant]'s sophisticated understanding of computers and software”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “no reasonable juror could have found there was not a sufficient nexus between the property and the offense. There was no question in this case that the specific computer listed in the forfeiture order was the one used by [the defendant] containing the illegal files.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “must determine before the jury begins deliberating whether either party requests that the jury be retained to determine the forfeitability of specific property if it returns a guilty verdict.”
    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.