United States v. Manko’s Empirical Analysis
772 F.2d 481 · 1985
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently November 2005
11 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 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)
Relies on Cabrera-Martinez v. United States · United States v. Benchimol · United States v. Brown · Guy v. Tip Top, Faberge, Inc · Herera v. Department of Justice
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“require reconsideration of a sentencing decision ‘when the defendant is given a full and fair opportunity to reveal inaccuracies in the information relied upon by the sentencing court and fails to do so.’”
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.