23 I. & N. Dec. 878 - ADAMIAK’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Pinho v. Gonzales · Renteria-Gonzalez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Garcia-Echaverria v. United States · United States v. Palacios-Suarez · Discipio v. Ashcroft
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In our decisions addressing the effect of State court orders vacating convictions, we have distinguished between situations in which a conviction is vacated based on post-conviction events, such as rehabilitation, and those in which a conviction is vacated because of a defect in the underlying criminal proceedings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the failure of the court to advise the [alien] of the possible immigration consequences of his guilty plea, as required by Ohio law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.