Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 45 F.3d 1423 - United States v. Robertson

United States v. Robertson’s Empirical Analysis

45 F.3d 1423 · 1995

Citation profile

226
cited by 226 later decisions
22
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

122 federal appellate · 9 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 226 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably United States v. McCullah (1996), United States v. Edwards (1995)

122 federal appellate · 9 district · 40 state decisions — followed in 22 states

12101995200020102020decided

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. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Johnson v. Zerbst · Giglio v. United States · Santobello v. New York · Duncan v. State of Louisiana

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

  1. “Where the government obtains a guilty plea predicated in any significant degree on a promise or agreement with the prosecuting attorney, such promise must be fulfilled to maintain the integrity of the plea.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “District courts have broad discretion to grant or deny the reduction for acceptance of responsibility, and thus, our review is under the clearly erroneous standard.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The adjustment should be applied if the weapon was present, unless it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.”
    4 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.