Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 978 F.2d 599 - Mahn v. Gunter

Mahn v. Gunter’s Empirical Analysis

978 F.3d 599 · 1992

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Boling v. Romer (1996), Garrity v. Fiedler (1994)

20 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

210199220002010decided

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 Brown v. Ohio · Angrist v. United States · United Transportation Union v. Taylor · Thiret v. Kautzky · Lustgarden v. Gunter

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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We note that in Thiret the sentence for the sexual offense had been completely served before the petitioner became eligible for parole of any type on the attempted murder charge. The twelve-year sentence for sexual assault in this case, however, has not been completely served. Whether that factor would have any bearing on the Thiret analysis in a case where the governing sentence required mandatory parole, but a concurrent sentence for a sexual offense had not been completely served, is a question we do not address.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We hold that, for Colorado offenses committed on or after July 1, 1979, but before July 1, 1985, when concurrent sentences are of equal length, if one of those sentences is for a sexual offense, parole is discretionary. To hold otherwise would place a prisoner who had committed both a sexual offense and another crime requiring mandatory parole in a better position than a prisoner who had been sentenced only for a sexual offense. This construction of the statutory parole scheme would be absurd and unwarranted.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “requires that unclear penal statutes must be construed in favor of the accused.”
    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.