United States v. Ursillo’s Empirical Analysis
786 F.2d 66 · 1986
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably United States v. Chang An-Lo (1988), United States v. Warner (1994)
49 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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. § 371 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Tucker · Townsend v. Burke · United States v. Malcolm · United States v. Rone · United States v. Needles
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f the comments of the defendant and the defendant’s counsel or testimony or other information introduced by them allege any factual inaccuracy in the pre-sentence investigation report or the summary of the report or part thereof, the court shall, as to each matter controverted, make (i) a finding as to the allegation, or (ii) a determination that no such finding is necessary because the matter controverted will not be taken into account in sentencing. A written record of such findings and determinations shall be appended to and accompany any copy of the presentence investigation report thereafter made available to the Bureau of Prisons.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““[w]here the defendant or his counsel allege any factual inaccuracies in the [presentence] report, the judge must either make a finding concerning the objection or a determination that such finding is unnecessary because ‘the matter controverted will not be taken into account in sentencing.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We have found no reported case in which a court held that Rule 32 standing alone furnished the jurisdictional basis for a belated post-sentencing attack on the accuracy of a presentence report.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.