34 F. Supp. 2d 265 - Rios v. Wiley’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3584 · 18 U.S.C. § 3585 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Wilson · United States v. Labeille-Soto · United States v. Grimes · Gomori v. Arnold · Willis 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unlike in Brown, where section 3568 did not prohibit double credit, section 3585(b) does, and since Rios received credit for the 22-month period on his New York state sentence, it could be argued that section 3585(b) prohibits credit here.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“), 28 F.3d 1073 (10th Cir. 1994), supplementing and clarifying Brown v. Perrill (”
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.