United States v. Cross’s Empirical Analysis
57 F.3d 588 · 1995
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2018 · most notably United States v. Vonn (2002), United States v. Schuh (2002)
22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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. § 751 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on McCarthy v. United States · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · Nagac v. Derwinski · Mattiza v. Texas · Benson v. Empire State Bank
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ny variance from the procedures required by this rule which does not affect substantial rights shall be disregarded.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“inquire as to whether the defendant's willingness to plead guilty or nolo contendere results from prior discussions between the attorney for the government and the defendant or the defendant's attorney.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'we inter [the pre-1983 per se reversible error] rule now in favor of the more straight-forward approach of universal application of Rule 11(h) harmless error analysis to review all complaints of Rule 11 violation[s] in which we find that an error was made.'”
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.