Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 340 F.3d 1022 - United States v. Sutter

United States v. Sutter’s Empirical Analysis

340 F.3d 1022 · 2003

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
December 2015
most recently cited

14 federal appellate ·

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 19 U.S.C. § 1581 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1582 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1701 · 19 U.S.C. § 482

Relies on Apprendi v. New Jersey · Henderson v. United States · United States v. Mentz · United States v. Chalkias · United States v. Ogbuehi

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

  1. “Continuing indefinitely a pro forma discovery motion violates the principles of Henderson. Henderson indicates that motions that do not result in a hearing do not toll the Speedy Trial clock unless resolved within 30 days from the time the motion is taken under advisement. See Henderson, 476 U.S. at 329 , 106 S.Ct. 1871 , 90 L.Ed.2d 299 (“ ‘if motions are so simple or routine that they do not require a hearing, necessary advisement time should be considerably less than 30 days.’ ”) (quoting S.Rep. No. 96-212). An indefinite “continuance” of a motion for which no hearing is scheduled is tantamount to an indefinite advisement period.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Under this rule, a pro forma discovery motion “continued” merely “in case” future discovery disputes arise is under advisement, because the motion is not set for a hearing nor is the court awaiting any ascertainable materials. Put another way, unless consideration of the motion is continued until a date certain or the happening of an event certain, the motion is deemed under advisément.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Sutter's indictment on September 18, 2001”
    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.