Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 F.2d 1399 - United States v. Wheat

United States v. Wheat’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 1399 · 1987

Citation profile

92
cited by 92 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
September 2025
most recently cited

56 federal appellate · 3 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 92 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2025 · most notably Wheat v. United States (1988), United States v. Collins (1990)

56 federal appellate · 3 district · 14 state decisions — followed in 10 states

41019871990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on Faretta v. California · Santobello v. New York · Cuyler v. Sullivan · McCarthy v. United States · Holloway v. Arkansas

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 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the sixth amendment also guarantees each criminal defendant the right to assistance of counsel 'unhindered by a conflict of interests.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “there is no constitutional right to plea bargain; the prosecutor need not do so if he prefers to go to trial. It is a novel argument that constitutional rights are infringed by trying the defendant rather than accepting his plea of guilty.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “conflicts of interests may arise if [the] cases are substantially related or if the attorney reveals privileged communications of the former client or otherwise divides his loyalties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.