Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 140 F.3d 424 - Stantini v. United States

Stantini v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

140 F.3d 424 · 1998

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
February 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1952B · 28 U.S.C. § 1631 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Triestman v. United States · Billy-Eko v. United States · Liriano v. United States · Chambers 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Applying the statutory language of § 2255 to this case, it becomes immediately clear that the Initial Motion was not a motion made pursuant to § 2255. The statute explicitly states that “[a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a coíírt ” may bring such a motion, for the purpose of vacating, setting aside, or correcting “the sentence.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (emphasis added). Simply, as [the defendant] was not in custody under a sentence at the time he filed the Initial Motion and at the time that motion was decided, it is not properly considered a § 2255 motion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 291 F. App'x 392 - United States v. Gonzalez
  2. “Given our conclusion that the Initial Motion is not properly considered to have been made and filed pursuant to § 2255, the gatekeeping provisions of AEDPA do not apply to the [present] § 2255 Motion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Graham v. Costello

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.