United States v. Saadya’s Empirical Analysis
750 F.2d 1419 · 1985
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably United States v. Robertson (1995), United States v. Cochran (1985)
12 federal appellate · 21 state decisions — followed in 13 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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Boykin v. Alabama · Johnson v. Zerbst · Carnley v. Cochran · Patton v. United States · Smith 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in writing with the approval of the court and the consent of the government,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘[T]he duty of the trial court in that regard is not to be discharged as a mere matter of rote, but with sound and advised discretion, with an eye to avoid unreasonable or undue departures from that mode of trial.’”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Coita · State v. Aliberti““In [United States v.] Reyes, [ 603 F.2d 69 (9th Cir.1979) ] we said that a post-trial waiver was not sufficiently reliable and might be based on ‘subtle coercion [that] is difficult to detect in the appellate record.’ 603 F.2d at 72 . We also said that it was necessary for the waiver to occur on the record at the time the right was surrendered for two related reasons: one, so that the defendant would understand that his waiver was ‘an important step in the trial,’ id. at 71 , and, two, so that the judge might question the defendant and evaluate his responses at the time the decision was made. Id. at 72 .””
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.