Gilinsky v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
335 F.2d 914 · 1964
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently July 1999 · most notably United States v. Mathews (1987), United States v. Willis (1986)
30 federal appellate · 4 district · 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Hill v. United States · Bell v. United States · Kercheval v. United States · Braverman v. United States · Heflin v. United States
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a Rule 35 proceeding contemplates the correction of a sentence of a court having jurisdiction,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“jurisdictional defects .... must ordinarily be presented under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the court may correct an illegal sentence at any time.”
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.