United States v. Dace’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 federal appellate ·

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

1. “[W]e deem it appropriate to emphasize that where the presentence report is not disclosed to a defendant, “[i]t is always advisable for the trial judge to at least state on the record the various factors he has taken into consideration in rendering his sentence. * * * Such a procedure serves as a checkmate to the danger of misinformation being placed in the hands of the court.” United States v. Carden, 428 F.2d 1116 , 1118 (8th Cir. 1970) (emphasis added). Failure to do so may well require a vacation of sentence and remand for resentencing under the teachings of Townsend v. Burke, 334 U.S. 736 , 68 S.Ct. 1252 , 92 L.Ed. 1690 (1948); and United States v. Tucker, 404 U.S. 443 , 92 S.Ct. 589 , 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1972).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Neal

2. “We acknowledge on the other hand that the Advisory Committee, in recommending Rule 32(c), did not contemplate an absolute rule of nondisclosure without relevancy to the' particular circumstance of a case. In fact the Advisory Committee observed in part: “It is hoped that courts will make increasing use of their discretion to disclose so that defendants generally may be given full opportunity to rebut or explain facts in presentence reports which will be material factors in determining sentences.” (Emphasis ours.) Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules, Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(2) (18 U.S.C.A. Supp.1970.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Pugh