United States v. Mittelsteadt’s Empirical Analysis
790 F.2d 39 · 1986
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Johnson v. United States (1986), Theodorou v. United States (1989)
26 federal appellate · 3 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. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky · Ruviwat v. Smith · United States v. Leath · Coates v. Smith
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The real purpose of the appellant’s motion appears to be to modify the terms of his imprisonment. He contends in particular that the Parole Commission is refusing to consider paroling him because of the magnitude of the fraud as revealed in the presentence report which he contends is inaccurate.... Section 2255 provides the procedure for challenging federal convictions and sentences; if a prisoner wants “out” for some other reason his remedy is habeas corpus, and (with immaterial exceptions) the proper venue for the habeas corpus proceeding is the district court where he is being held. We add that the prisoner must exhaust his administrative remedies be fore the Parole Commission before he is eligible for habeas corpus relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Section 2255 provides the procedure for challenging federal convictions and sentences; if a prisoner wants 'out' for some other reason his remedy [after exhausting his administrative remedies], is habeas corpus.”
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.