United States v. Withers’s Empirical Analysis
128 F.3d 1167 · 1997
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Johnson v. United States (2000), Johnson v. United States (2000)
29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3583
Relies on Weaver v. Graham · Dobbert v. Florida · Collins v. Youngblood · Miller v. Florida · Calder et Wife, v. Bull et Wife.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“forbid[ ] legislative change that has any conceivable risk of affecting a prisoner's punishment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“less than the maximum term of imprisonment authorized under subsection (e)(3).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As it was written before the 1994 amendments, subsection (3) did not provide (as it now does) that the court could revoke the release term and require service of a prison term equal to the maxi mum authorized length of a term of supervised release. It provided, rather, that the court could “revoke a term of supervised release, and require the person to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release .So far as the text is concerned, it is not a “term of imprisonment” that is to be served, but all or part of “the term of supervised release.” But if “the term of supervised release” is being served, in whole or part, in prison, then something about the term of supervised release survives the preceding order of revocation. While this sounds very metaphysical, the metaphysics make one thing clear: unlike a “terminated” order of supervised release, one that is “revoked” continues to have some effect. And since it continues in some sense after revocation even when part of it is served in prison, why can the balance of it not remain effective as a term of supervised release when the reincarceration is over?”
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.