Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 321 F.3d 686 - United States v. Blalock

United States v. Blalock’s Empirical Analysis

321 F.3d 686 · 2003

Citation profile

137
cited by 137 later decisions
July 2022
most recently cited

30 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably United States v. Konczak (2012), United States v. Ortiz (2005)

30 federal appellate ·

770200320102020decided

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 v. LeDonne · United States v. Wetterlin · United States of America v. John Noble · United States v. Ramsey

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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he validity of a Rule 11 colloquy is based on the totality of the circumstances, including such factors as “the complexity of the charge, the defendant’s level of intelligence, age, and education, whether the defendant was represented by counsel, the judge’s inquiry during the plea hearing and the defendant’s statements, as well as the evidence proffered by the government.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “totally uncorroborated and comes from an admitted liar, convicted felon, or large scale drug-dealing, paid government informant.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Rule 11 only requires that the court inform the defendant of the maximum and minimum penalties authorized under the applicable statute, as well as the fact that the particular sentence imposed will be determined by reference to the federal sentencing guidelines”); United States v. Pearson, 910 F.2d 221 , 223 (5th Cir.1990) (Explaining that Rule 1 l's”
    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.