United States v. Ferri’s Empirical Analysis
686 F.2d 147 · 1982
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 8 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably United States v. Horak (1987), Greco v. State (1997)
47 federal appellate · 8 district · 4 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 Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Weaver v. Graham · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass'n · Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Fjrom the outset, [the defendant] was put on notice that the government was challenging the reduction of his sentence. After filing its appeal, the government, being justifiably uncertain as to the proper procedural vehicle for review of an order reducing a criminal sentence, filed its petition for a writ of mandamus____ Thus, in view of the fact that in this case the government expeditiously appealed the order in question, we reject [the defendant’s] contention that the government is guilty of laches with respect to its filing of the mandamus petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence. A motion for such relief may be made at any time.”
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.