United States v. Elliott’s Empirical Analysis
264 F.3d 1171 · 2001
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently June 2026 · most notably United States v. Hahn (2004), United States v. Mitchell (2008)
24 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
Relies on United States of America v. Tommy Don Cockerham · United States v. Gordon · United States v. Davis · United States v. Wenger · United States v. Baramdyka
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ppellate waivers are subject to certain exceptions, including where the district court relied on an impermissible factor such as race, where ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the negotiation of the waiver renders the waiver invalid, where the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, or where the waiver is otherwise unlawful.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“THE COURT: Now, the law gives you some appeal rights in this criminal case and you have those rights unless you waive them. Do you understand that? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Do you understand, Mr. Perry, that in this plea agreement, you are waiving most of your appeal rights? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: In fact, you’re waiving most of your rights to appeal the sentence that I impose in this case, do you understand that? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: And in this agreement you’re waiving those rights even though you do not yet know what your sentence will be in this case, do you understand that? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Now, I want to look at those waivers.... Paragraph 8 says, in substance, that I will consider the factors provided by law in imposing the sentence in this case, and that I have the jurisdiction and authority to impose any sentence within the maximum that [the government] mentioned a few minutes ago. Paragraph 8 goes on to say that you do have the right to appeal the judgment and sentence imposed by the Court but that in exchange for the promises and concessions made by the government in the plea agreement, you are voluntarily giving up most of those appeal rights. Specifically, as it’s set forth in paragraph 8(a), you are giving up your right to appeal or challenge in any other way any rulings made by the Court in this case. Do you understand that? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: In paragraph 8(b) you’re giving up the right”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[Pjublic policy strongly supports plea agreements that include an appeal waiver. A waiver of appellate rights can be of great value to an accused as a means of gaining concessions from the government. Appeal waivers also benefit the government by saving [it] the time and money involved in arguing appeals. Society benefits from the finality that waivers bring.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.