Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 558 F.2d 1073 - United States v. Saft

United States v. Saft’s Empirical Analysis

558 F.2d 1073 · 1977

Citation profile

175
cited by 175 later decisions
13
states following
January 2023
most recently cited

109 federal appellate · 9 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 175 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably State v. Badgett (1986), United States v. Dayton (1979)

109 federal appellate · 9 district · 17 state decisions — followed in 13 states

800197719801990200020102020decided

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

Relies on Brady v. United States · United States v. Mitchell · Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. · United States v. Washington · General Protective Committee v. Securities & Exchange Commission

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

  1. “[T]he Rule does not say that compliance can be achieved only by reading the specified items in haec verba. Congress meant to strip district judges of the freedom to decide what they must explain to a defendant who wishes to plead guilty, not to tell them precisely how to perform this important task in the great variety of cases that would come before them. While a judge who contents himself with literal application of the Rule will hardly be reversed, it cannot be supposed that Congress preferred this to a more meaningful explanation, provided that all specified elements were covered.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “shall not accept a plea of guilty ... without first, by addressing the defendant personally in open court, determining that the plea is voluntary and not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from a plea agreement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Before accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court must address the defendant personally in open court and inform him of, and determine that he understands, the following:”
    3 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.