U.S. v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
919 F.3d 1 · 2019
Citation profile
3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2251 (Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Brown v. Illinois · Illinois v. Rodriguez · Oliver v. United States · Bell 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[T]he purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct' . . . 'is the most important part of the analysis "because it is tied directly to the rationale - 31 - underlying the exclusionary rule, deterrence of police misconduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“if Congress does not fix the punishment for a federal offense clearly and without ambiguity, doubt will be resolved against turning a single transaction into multiple offenses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“that the proper unit of prosecution of [18 U.S.C. §] 2251(a) is each video depicting the victim,”
1 later decision 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.