Dat v. U.S.’s Empirical Analysis
920 F.3d 1192 · 2019
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 16 · 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (§ 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1229B (§ 240a of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Hill v. Lockhart · Padilla v. Kentucky · Jae Lee v. United States · 133 S. Ct. 1103 - Chaidez 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's error, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable.”
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.