Matamoros v. Grams’s Empirical Analysis
706 F.3d 783 · 2013
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 4161 · 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Gall v. United States · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Hewitt v. Helms · Office of Personnel Management v. Richmond · United States v. Batchelder
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]ltimately, Matamoros' own criminal conduct is the basis for his continued incarceration and the detainer. We find nothing unfair about this case that would justify the extreme remedy of applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel against the government.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The purpose of the detainer is to make sure the U.S. Marshal is notified when Matamoros is discharged from his state prison sentence so he can be immediately taken into federal custody for a revocation of parole hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the Notice of Discharge incorrectly stated that Matamoros was no longer subject to the Commission's supervision.”
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.