United States of America v. Alejandro Jimenez-Nava’s Empirical Analysis
243 F.3d 192 · 2001
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 2 district · 23 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Berkemer v. McCarty · Dickerson v. United States · Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. · Edye v. Robertson · United States v. Rauscher
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Arresting] authorities shall inform the person concerned without delay of his rights under this sub-paragraph.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of functions by consular posts on behalf of their respective States.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Treaties] do not generally create rights that are enforceable in the courts.”); United States v. Emuegbunam, 268 F.3d 377 , 389 (6th Cir.2001) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mora v. New York · Sorto v. State
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.