United States v. Cates’s Empirical Analysis
897 F.3d 349 · 2018
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252A (§ 101 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 6 U.S.C. § 473
Relies on Stinson v. United States · Webb v. Texas · United States v. Batista-Polanco · United States v. Harotunian · United States v. Layton
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.
“In adopting Amendment 801, the Sentencing Commission explained that, in general, it was attempting to codify the approach of the Second, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits, all of which had held that when a 'knowing distribution' enhancement is premised upon the use of a peer-to-peer file-sharing program, the enhancement requires only that a defendant know 'of the file-sharing properties of the program.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. Cates is instructive. There, we determined that the district court drew a reasonable inference that the defendant knew of the file-sharing properties of a peer-to-peer network when it relied on evidence that the defendant was”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“by which files downloaded from [the file-sharing program] would bypass his master hard drive and be saved automatically to the 'sharing folder' housed on a subservient drive”
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.