Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 447 F.3d 999 - United States v. Walker

United States v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

447 F.3d 999 · 2006

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Irizarry v. United States (2008), United States v. Vampire Nation (2006)

49 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

580200620102020decided

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. § 111 (Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 3553

Relies on United States v. Booker · United States v. Olano · Burns v. United States · United States v. Mykytiuk · United States v. Dean

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

  1. “defendants are on notice post- Booker that sentencing courts have discretion to consider any of the factors specified in § 3553(a)”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “notice of an intent to depart or vary from the guidelines remains a critical part of sentencing post- Booker, " because "[t]here is `essentially no limit on the number of potential factors that may warrant a departure' or a variance, and neither the defendant nor the Government `is in a position to guess when or on what grounds a district court might depart' or vary from the guidelines.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Before the court may depart from the applicable sentencing range on a ground not identified for departure either in the presen-tence report or in a party's prehearing submission, the court must give the parties reasonable notice that it is contemplating such a departure. The notice must specify any ground on which the court is contemplating a departure.”
    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.