United States v. Morrow’s Empirical Analysis
914 F.2d 608 · 1990
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably Ballard v. Burton (2006), United States v. Riascos-Suarez (1996)
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on North Carolina v. Alford · Bordenkircher v. Hayes · Blackledge v. Allison · Blumenthal v. United States · United States v. Timmreck
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For a violation of Rule 11 to be collaterally attacked, it must result in a complete miscarriage of justice or be inconsistent with the rudimentary demands of fair procedure. United States v. Timmreck, 441 U.S. 780, 783-84 , 99 S.Ct. 2085, 2087 , 60 L.Ed.2d 634 (1979).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“any Rule 11 proceeding requires that a factual basis for the plea be established and we are unwilling to place more requirements in the context of an Alford plea.”
1 later decision 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.