Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 409 F.3d 535 - United States v. Rosen

United States v. Rosen’s Empirical Analysis

409 F.3d 535 · 2005

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on United States v. Booker · Blakely v. Washington · McCarthy v. United States · Kercheval v. United States · United States v. Timmreck

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

  1. “despite the post-plea self-serving statements that Rosen did not know of the overall design or scheme, that he had taken the position from the outset that he did not knowingly and deliberately participate in the manipulation of the stock of H & R, and that he had no intent to defraud, the record of Rosen’s allocution and plea of guilty conclusively established that he knew all of the elements of the offenses with which he was charged, knew of the securities fraud conspiracy, intended to participate in it, and engaged in manipulative trading knowingly, intentionally, and with intent to defraud.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In general, to determine whether the defendant has shown a ‘fair and just reason’ to justify withdrawal, a district court considers, inter alia: (1) whether the defendant has asserted his or her legal innocence in the motion to withdraw the guilty plea; (2) the amount of time that has elapsed between the plea and the motion (the longer the elapsed time, the less likely withdrawal would be fair and just); and (3) whether the government would be prejudiced by a withdrawal of the plea.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Criminal Rule 11(b)(3), whose substantive predecessor was Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(f) until December 1, 2002, provides that `before entering judgment on a guilty plea, the court must determine that there is a factual basis for the plea.'”
    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.