United States v. Luis’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1345 · 18 U.S.C. § 1347 (§ 242 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (§ 902 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 24 (§ 241 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 982 (§ 1366 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 1131 (§ 501 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Mathews v. Eldridge · Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez · Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In exercising its discretion for release of assets for payment of attorney’s fees, the Court should consider whether the defendant is able to afford representation in the § 1345 proceedings. See United States v. Speqtrum, Inc., No. CIV.A. 10-2111 JEB, 2012 WL 517526 , at (D.D.C. Feb. 16, 2012); United States v. Jaime, No. 2:10-CV-00498, 2011 WL 145196 , at -2 (S.D.W.Va. Jan. 18, 2011). If “restrained property is a defendant’s only means of securing counsel” the Court may wish to exercise its discretion to release assets to secure counsel. See Speqtrum, Inc., 2012 WL 517526 , at .”
1 later decision 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.