Sotelo v. Hadden’s Empirical Analysis
721 F.2d 700 · 1983
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 2008 · most notably McIntosh v. United States Parole Commission (1997), Kell v. United States Parole Commission (1994)
16 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Solomon v. Elsea · Dye v. United States Parole Commission · 371 F. Supp. 156 - Lupo v. Norton · Campbell v. United States Parole Commission · Alessi v. Quinlan
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unless there is a clear showing of arbitrary and capricious action or an abuse of discretion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Your offense behavior has been rated as very high severity insofar as it involved importation and possession with intent to distribute quantities of marijuana totaling 3300 pounds. You have a salient factor score of 10. You have been in custody a total of 37 months. Guidelines established by the Commission for adult cases indicate a range of 26 to 36 months imprisonment for cases with good institutional program performance and adjustment. “You escaped from a federal prison camp and remained absent more than seven days. Guidelines established by the Commission indicate an additional range of 6 to 12 months imprisonment for that conduct. “After review of all relevant factors and information presented, a decision above the combined guideline range (32 to 48 months) is found to be warranted because you are a poorer parole risk than indicated by your salient factor score. This conclusion is based on (1) your series of three major marijuana offenses over five years, which is indicative of a commitment to a criminal career, and (2) the fact that two of those three offenses were committed while you were on appeal bond from the first conviction.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]here is a great difference between distributing only 50 grams of heroin and distributing 100 pounds of heroin a month, the magnitude of the latter obviously being much greater than that of the former .... Also, a 'leadership role' in the distribution scheme is not necessarily identical to the finding that Sotelo also had a 'managerial' or 'proprietary' interest in the distribution. In short, the reasons given by the Board for going above the guidelines are not the same as the factors relied on by the Board in rating Sotelo's offense severity.”
2 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.