United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
89 F.3d 778 · 1996
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably United States v. Tobin (2012), United States v. Bradley (2006)
16 federal appellate · 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
Relies on National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Weatherford v. Bursey · Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Ogilvie · Washington v. Harper · Bibby 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the district court’s statements were made during a change-of-plea colloquy; (2) the court responded to the defendant’s hesitance with invitations to break off the colloquy and go to trial, which the defendant did not accept; (3) the statements did not “touch on the sentence”; (4) the statements were not otherwise coercive, but correctly identified the “obvious risk” of pleading guilty to the substantive offense and proceeding to trial on the conspiracy charge; and (5) the statements reminded the defendant of his right to choose between the two courses, but explicitly left the decision to the defendant and his attorney.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As Casallas stood before the district court ready to return to Texas for trial, the district court judge contrasted the fifteen-year minimum mandatory that Casallas faced by going to trial in Texas with the ten-year minimum mandatory that Casallas faced by pleading to the conspiracy count. The judge stated: “if he pleads this afternoon he would get a minimum mandatory of ten, apparently which is a lot better than fifteen.” The judge followed this statement with additional advice that Casallas “talk to his lawyer some and see if that is really what he wants to do.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]ourts of [a]ppeals all appear to hold that any `discussion of the penal consequences of a guilty plea as compared to going to trial is inherently coercive, no matter how well-intentioned.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Crumb
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.