Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 944 F.2d 396 - United States v. Johnson

United States v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

944 F.2d 396 · 1991

Citation profile

152
cited by 152 later decisions
4
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

122 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 152 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably United States v. Gonzalez-Lerma (1994), United States v. Bland (1992)

122 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

990199120002010decided

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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 851 (§ 411 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Solem v. Helm · Harmelin v. Michigan · Rideout v. United States · Rummel v. Estelle · Serfass 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 152 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) Information filed by United States Attorney (1) No person who stands convicted of an offense under this part shall be sentenced to increased punishment by reason of one or more prior convictions, unless before trial, or before entry of a plea of guilty, the United States attorney files an information with the court (and serves a copy of such information on the person or counsel for the person) stating in writing the previous convictions to be relied upon. Upon a showing by the United States attorney that facts regarding prior convictions could not with due diligence be obtained prior to trial or before entry of a plea of guilty, the court may postpone the trial or the taking of the plea of guilty for a reasonable period for the purpose of obtaining such facts. Clerical mistakes in the information may be amended at any time prior to the pronouncement of sentence.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “allows the defendant ample time to determine whether he should enter a plea or go to trial, and to plan his trial strategy with full knowledge of the consequences of a potential guilty verdict.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “at the root of some of the gravest problems facing our country. The 'fruit' of the drug plague is everywhere; it fills our jails, our courts, our streets, and our nurseries.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.