Baumann v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
692 F.2d 565 · 1982
Citation profile
173 federal appellate · 7 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 284 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably United States v. Keller (1990), Shah v. United States (1989)
173 federal appellate · 7 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 20 states
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. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Brady v. State of Maryland · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · Haines v. Kerner · United States v. Wade
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 284 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[N]o blearing is required if the allegations, viewed against the record either fail to state a claim for relief or are so palpably incredible or patently frivolous as to warrant summary dismissal.'”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief, the court shall ... grant a prompt hearing ..., determine the issues and make findings of fact and conclusions of law.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[F]ailure to raise a meritless legal argument does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.”
6 later decisions 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.