United States v. Sanchez’s Empirical Analysis
650 F.2d 745 · 1981
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently January 2012
9 federal appellate · 2 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
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · McCarthy v. United States · Exxon Corp. v. Department of Revenue of Wisconsin · United States v. Dayton · United States v. Caston
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rule 11(c)(2) [the precursor to the present Rule 11(b)(1)(D)], by its own language, limits the necessity for such a charge to situations where 'the defendant is not represented by an attorney' at the plea proceeding.” Id. The dissent would avoid the force of the deletion of this clause by resorting to the Advisory Committee Notes pertinent to the 2002 amendments to Rule 11, which assert that those amendments were”
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.