Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 527 F.3d 188 - In re Sealed Case

In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis

527 F.3d 188 · 2008

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
January 2022
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably United States v. Mondragon-Santiago (2009), United States v. Cavera (2008)

38 federal appellate · 3 district ·

440200820102020decided

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. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 3583 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on United States v. Booker · Gall v. United States · Rita v. United States · Kimbrough v. United States · Sells v. United States

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

  1. “The district court's failure to explain adequately the sentence it imposed is prejudicial in itself because it precludes appellate review of the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, thus seriously affecting the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “It is important not only for the defendant but also for 'the public to learn why the defendant received a particular sentence.’ ” (quoting United States v. Lewis, 424 F.3d 239 , 247 (2d Cir.2005))). 31 . United States v. Delvecchio, 920 F.2d 810 , 813 (11th Cir.1991) (emphasis added) (parenthetical omitted); see also United States v. Williams, 438 F.3d 1272 , 1274-75 (11th Cir.2006) (per curiam) (stating that it is the”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “It has been uniform and constant in the federal judicial tradition for the sentencing judge to consider every convicted person as an individual and every case as a unique study in the human failings that sometimes mitigate, sometimes magnify, the crime and the punishment to ensue.”
    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.