Narvaez v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
674 F.3d 621 · 2011
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 18 U.S.C. § 3231 · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Booker · Slack v. McDaniel · Teague v. Lane · Bailey v. United States · United States v. Tucker
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he imposition of the career offender status branded Mr. Narvaez as a malefactor deserving of far greater punishment than that usually meted out for an otherwise similarly situated individual who had committed the same offense. It created a legal presumption that he was to be treated differently from other offenders because he belonged in a special category reserved for the violent and incorrigible. No amount of evidence in mitigation or extenuation could erase that branding or its effect on his sentence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]o classify an individual as belonging to a “subgroup of defendants, repeat violent offenders” is to “increase, dramatically, the point of departure of his sentence” and accordingly is “certainly as serious as the most grievous misinformation that has been the basis for granting habeas relief.” Thus, the misapplication of the sentencing guidelines, at least where (as here) the defendant was sentenced in the pre-Booker era, represents a fundamental defect that constitutes a miscarriage of justice corrigible in a § 2241 proceeding.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o assume that the same sentence would have been imposed in the absence of the career offender provision ... is frail conjecture that evinces in itself an arbitrary disregard of the petitioner's right to liberty.”
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.