United States v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis
710 F.3d 23 · 2013
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 851 (§ 411 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Brady v. United States · United States v. Teeter · Scarpa v. Dubois · United States v. Mala · Prou v. United States
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]o successfully invoke the miscarriage of justice exception, a 'garden-variety error will not suffice,' rather there must be, 'at a bare minimum, an increment of error more glaring than routine reversible error.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]uch a provision forecloses appellate review of many claims of error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“we consider, among other things, the clarity of the alleged error, its character and gravity, its impact on the defendant, any possible prejudice to the government, and the extent to which the defendant acquiesced in the result.”
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.