Rosa v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
397 F.2d 401 · 1968
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 7237 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Peyton v. Rowe · Walker v. Wainwright · Dodd v. United States · Boruff v. United States · Doyle 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Rosa has never had an evidentiary hearing to establish any of the facts which he has alleged in his petition. Such an evidentiary hearing would receive all evidence of the facts surrounding the alleged failure of his counsel to take an appeal or of the trial court to advise him of his right to appeal and right to counsel on appeal. See Baker v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1968, 391 F.2d 248 ; Dodd v. United States, 9 Cir., 1963, 321 F.2d 240 ; Doyle v. United States, 9 Cir., 1966, 366 F.2d 394 . It would also provide an opportunity to prove the new facts surrounding the alleged entrapment by Federal Narcotics Agent Marshall who, Rosa contends, entrapped him in order to establish a record of convictions as a narcotics agent, and thereby make it possible to provide protection to narcotics suppliers in the Miami area for which he received bribe payments. We assume that appellant would also show what, if any, rights and privileges he is denied at the Federal Penitentiary because of the existence of the first conviction.””
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.