Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 816 F.2d 1313 - Walker v. United States

Walker v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

816 F.2d 1313 · 1987

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

58 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Shah v. United States (1989), United States v. Johnson (1993)

58 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

4801987199020002010decided

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. § 2113 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Wallace v. Christensen · Roberts v. Corrothers · Solomon v. Elsea · United States v. Quan · Jones 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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “aggravating circumstances in a particular case may justify a decision or a severity rating different from that listed.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Judgments involving a broad range of factors that the Commission takes into account in arriving at its decision are committed to the Commission's discretion and are unreviewable even for abuse of discretion.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the scope of judicial review of the Commission's parole decision ... is exceedingly narrow,”
    5 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.