United States v. Colon-Ortiz’s Empirical Analysis
866 F.2d 6 · 1989
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably United States v. Corley (1990), United States v. Ferryman (1990)
31 federal appellate · 6 district · 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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Connally v. General Construction Co. · United States v. Harriss · Lanzetta v. State New Jersey · United States v. Batchelder · United States v. Batchelder
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“due process requires that criminal statutes put individuals on sufficient notice as to whether their contemplated conduct is prohibited.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“an inadvertent drafting error, and should be stricken from the statute,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“language meant the statute could be read to impose two inconsistent penalty schemes: one allowing the court to impose only a fine; the other requiring the imposition of a five-year minimum prison term. Both parties agree that, for relevant purposes, the language in 21 U.S.C. Sec. 960(b)(2)(A) is identical to that of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841(b)(1)(B). Consequently, Sec. 960(b)(2)(A), like Sec. 841(b)(1)(B), may be read to impose two inconsistent penalty schemes. 6 In Colon-Ortiz, we held that”
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.