United States v. Coffey’s Empirical Analysis
871 F.2d 39 · 1989
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Green v. French (1998), United States v. Franklin (1990)
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 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
Relies on Hill v. United States · Green v. United States · United States v. Turner · United States v. Core
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]efore imposing sentence, the court must ... (C) address the defendant personally and determine whether the defendant wishes to make a statement and to present any information in mitigation of the sentence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“does not specifically mention probation revocation hearings but only requires the right of allocution be given before imposing sentence. We interpret the rule to mean that allocution is required only before imposing the original sentence....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“allocution is not required before resentencing after probation revocation.”
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.