Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 354 F.3d 621 - United States v. Morgan

United States v. Morgan’s Empirical Analysis

354 F.3d 621 · 2003

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
November 2023
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 2023

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

110200320102020decided

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 Whren v. United States · California v. Hodari D. · Old Chief v. United States · Atwater v. City of Lago Vista · United States v. Beasley

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

  1. “The idea behind [§ 4A1.2(a)(2) ] is that a single criminal episode may give rise to multiple' convictions ... and should count only once no matter how the prosecutor drafts the charges; but a defendant who commits a crime, is arrested for that offense, and then commits another crime is a recidivist whose criminal record should be tallied in full. ... No matter what word is used, Morgan was caught red handed, driving after his license’s revocation. He went right on committing that offense. Clever charging practices did not multiply his convictions; his failure to adhere to the law following his initial apprehension is the root cause. Calling the traffic stop an “arrest” implements the Sentencing Commission’s goal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If the defendant has multiple prior sentences, determine whether those sentences are counted separately or as a single sentence. Prior sentences always are counted separately if the sentences were imposed for offenses that were separated by an intervening arrest (i.e., the defendant is arrested for the first offense prior to committing the second offense). If there is no intervening arrest, prior sentences are counted separately unless (A) the sentences resulted from offenses contained in the same charging instrument; or (B) the sentences were imposed on the same day. Count any prior sentence covered by (A) or (B) as a single sentence. See also § 4Al.l(e).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A tale bereft of narrative is hard either to follow or to credit.”
    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.