Gilberto Lopez-Ramirez v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the 1994 Misdemeanor Streamlining Act set maximum fines for misdemeanors at $1000
• explaining that the 1994 Misdemeanor Streamlining Act set maximum fines for misdemeanors at $1000
• acknowledging the judicial aim is “to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent” as reflected in a statute’s text (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “When interpreting a statute, the judicial task is to discern, and give effect to, the legislature’s intent.” (quoting In re C.G.H., 75 A.3d 166, 171 (D.C. 2013))
• in addition to statutory language, court must consider \the legislative history and the larger statutory scheme\; court has \reject[ed] a statutory interpretation that would lead to incongruous consequences and was in tension with other statutes\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• J.P. v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2018-07-26· cited 16×
• Mario Giovani Valendzuela-Castillo v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2018-03-08· cited 1×
• Kornegay v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2020-09-03
• United States v. Hawkins
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2021-10-21
• Robinson v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2021-11-10
• Lumen Eight Media Group LLC v. D.C. CLPF-CC, Pavilio v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2022-08-11
• United States v. Facon
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2023-01-26
• Wilson v. Bowser
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2025-02-06
• Tornero v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2025-05-15
• Williams v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2025-10-23

Cites

36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.
  Supreme Court· 1982-05-17· cited 2,347×
• Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.
  Supreme Court· 2000-03-28· cited 1,963×
• United States v. Bajakajian
  Supreme Court· 1998-06-22· cited 1,395×
• Dolan v. United States Postal Service
  Supreme Court· 2006-02-22· cited 655×
• Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 2015-03-25· cited 449×
• Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1983-12-15· cited 355×
• Lewis v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1996-06-24· cited 209×
• Grayson v. AT & T CORP.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2011-01-20· cited 139×
• United States v. Nachtigal
  Supreme Court· 1993-02-22· cited 137×
• Davis v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1979-01-29· cited 126×
• District of Columbia v. Thompson
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-06-17· cited 126×
• United States v. George Vernon Hansen
  D.C. Circuit· 1985-08-30· cited 121×
• Speyer v. Barry
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-03-29· cited 56×
• Tippett v. Daly
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2010-12-30· cited 56×
• United States v. Charles E. Mayberry
  Tenth Circuit· 1985-10-07· cited 47×
• Edwards v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-11-13· cited 47×
• United States v. Kenneth King
  Fourth Circuit· 1987-07-29· cited 38×
• Hood v. United States
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2011-09-15· cited 38×
• Odeniran v. Hanley Wood, LLC
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2009-12-17· cited 36×
• O'Rourke v. District of Columbia Police & Firefighters' Retirement & Relief Board
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2012-06-21· cited 28×