Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 588 F.2d 360 - Pacelli v. United States

Pacelli v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

588 F.2d 360 · 1978

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
3
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably United States v. Natanel (1991), United States v. Losada (1982)

27 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

24019781980199020002010decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Wainwright v. Sykes · Fay v. Noia · Benton v. Maryland

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

  1. ““A motion for relief made pursuant to these rules may be dismissed if it appears that the government has been prejudiced in its ability to respond to the motion by delay in its filing unless the movant shows that it is based on grounds of which he could not have had knowledge by the exercise of reasonable diligence before the circumstances prejudicial to the government occurred.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.