United States v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co. · Carlisle v. United States · Smith v. Pollin · Thompson v. United States · United States v. Lafayette
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“not afforded the opportunity to act within the time allotted by the Rule[,] [and] this Court has no authority to extend the time for filing such a challenge beyond the time allotted by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The court may not extend the time to take any action under Rule 35, except as stated in that rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a sentence that resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error”
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.