Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 F.2d 472 - United States v. Michaelson

United States v. Michaelson’s Empirical Analysis

552 F.2d 472 · 1977

Citation profile

95
cited by 95 later decisions
3
states following
March 2003
most recently cited

70 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently March 2003 · most notably United States v. Dayton (1979), United States v. Spencer (1987)

70 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions

4101977198019902000decided

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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990)

Relies on Kercheval v. United States · United States v. Mitchell · Podell v. United States · Everett v. United States · United States v. Needles

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

  1. “the defendant has the burden of satisfying the trial judge that there are valid grounds for withdrawal, taking into account any prejudice to the government.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... (c) Advice to Defendant. Before accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court must address the defendant personally in open court and inform the defendant of, and determine that the defendant understands, the following: (1) the nature of the charge to which the plea is offered, the mandatory minimum penalty provided by law, if any, and the maximum possible penalty provided by law, including the effect of any special parole term and, when applicable, that the court may also order the defendant to make restitution to any victim of the offense; and (2) if the defendant is not represented by an attorney, that the defendant has the right to be represented by an attorney at every stage of the proceeding and, if necessary, one will be appointed to represent the defendant; and (3) that the defendant has the right to plead not guilty or to persist in that plea if it has already been made, the right to be tried by a jury and at that trial the right to the assistance of counsel, the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and the right against compelled self-incrimination; and (4) that if a plea of guilty or nolo conten-dere is accepted by the court there will not be a further trial of any kind, so that by pleading guilty or nolo contendere the defendant waives the right to a trial; and (5) if the court intends to question the defendant under oath, on the record, and in the presence of counsel about the offense to which the defendant has pleaded, that the d”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “that a major purpose of the amendments to Rule 11 and its strict reading in Journet is to avoid all such fine inquiries by establishing a detailed prophylactic check list,”
    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.