United States v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis
157 F.3d 661 · 1998
Citation profile
12 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably United States of America v. Gamma Tech Industries Inc (2001), United States v. Gasca-Ruiz (2017)
12 federal appellate ·
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
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Sanders v. United States · Cacoperdo v. Demosthenes · United States v. McMullen · United States v. Hicks
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable fact finder would have found the movant guilty of the offense; or (2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A “ground is successive if the basic thrust or gravamen of the legal claim is the same, regardless of whether the basic claim is supported by new and different legal arguments.... Identical grounds may often be proved by different factual allegations.... ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he only sentence that is legally cognizable is the actual oral pronouncement in the presence of the defendant.”
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.