United States v. Bentz’s Empirical Analysis
21 F.3d 37 · 1994
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably State v. Hodge (1994), United States of America v. Al Richards Kurt Latrasse and Roger Braugh (2000)
11 federal appellate · 2 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. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Pereira v. United States · Schmuck v. United States · Conway v. Statesman Mortgage Co. · Bowsher v. Merck & Co. · Benjamin 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e need not reach the issuance of whether a guilty plea waives jurisdictional as well as nonjurisdictional defects. Compare United States ex rel. Shank v. Pennsylvania, 461 F.2d 61 , 62 (3d Cir.1972) (asserting that guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional defects), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1110 , 93 S.Ct. 917 , 34 L.Ed.2d 691 (1973), and United States ex rel. Jenkins v. Hendricks, 405 F.2d 182 , 183 (3d Cir.1968) (same), with United States v. Mathews, 833 F.2d 161 , 164 (9th Cir.1987) (asserting that guilty plea “establishes the factual basis for jurisdiction”) (cited in United States v. Parker, 874 F.2d 174 , 178 (3d Cir.1989)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a conditional guilty plea is only appropriate when the matter preserved for appeal is case-dispositive and requires no further factual development”
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.