United States v. Antonakopoulos’s Empirical Analysis
399 F.3d 68 · 2005
Citation profile
308 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 396 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2022 · most notably United States v. Mares (2005), Cunningham v. California (2007)
308 federal appellate · 17 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. § 1344 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3663 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 18 U.S.C. § 656
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Booker · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Chapman v. State of California
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 396 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a reasonable probability that the district court would impose a different sentence [that is] more favorable to the [defendants] under the new `advisory Guidelines' Booker regime.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The argument that a Booker error occurred is preserved if the defendant below argued Apprendi or Blakely error or that the Guidelines were unconstitutional.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) that an error occurred (2) which was clear or obvious and which not only (3) affected [his] substantial rights, but also (4) seriously impaired the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
11 later decisions 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.