United States v. Chatelain’s Empirical Analysis
360 F.3d 114 · 2004
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2023
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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. § 3583 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Gagnon v. Scarpelli · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · Garner v. State of Louisiana Briscoe · Mozzochi v. Borden
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Due process requires, inter alia, that a defendant charged with violating a condition of supervised release be afforded notice of the charges against him before the court may revoke his supervised release. The notice must be sufficient to allow the releasee to prepare to defend against the charges. We would regard a petition asserting a violation of the supervised release requirement that the releasee not commit any new crime as providing adequate notice in accordance with Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(b)(2)(A) and the Constitution if it identifies the no-further-crime condition and the condition allegedly violated, identifies the crime allegedly committed, and contains a description of the basic facts underlying the new criminal charge, including the approximate dates of the events, the location at which they occurred, and the individuals involved.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It has apparently not been the policy of the Probation Office in the Eastern District of New York to docket [revocation] petitions. We urge the Probation Office of that District, and of all other Districts within this circuit, to take special note of these significant clerical responsibilities that are borne by the Probation Office in the first instance. We also think it advisable, in the interests of justice, that the U.S. Attorney’s Office, given its involvement and the formal legal training of its Assistants, undertake the filing of such petitions and their supporting documents in aid of future appellate review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“if “it identifies the no-further-crime condition as the condition allegedly violated, identifies the crime allegedly committed, and contains a description of the basic facts underlying the new criminal charge, including the approximate dates of the events, the location at which they occurred, and the individuals involved.”
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.