Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 12 F.2d 976 - Spencer v. Hamilton

Spencer v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis

12 F.2d 976 · 1926

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
3
states following
October 1959
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Ponzi v. Fessenden · State v. Wilson

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

  1. ““It is apparent that appellant was a fugitive from justice at the time he was apprehended, tried, and convicted in Utah upon the federal charge. His sentence, removal, and imprisonment to and in the penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kan., still outside the state of Texas, did not alter that status. The application for his removal to the latter state for trial was made under the doctrine announced * * * in Ponzi v. Fessenden, 258 U.S. 254 , 42 S.Ct. 309 , 66 L.Ed. 607 , 22 A.L.R. 879 , in which such procedure was recognized. * * * Under the conceded facts Spencer never ceased to be, in a legal sense, a fugitive from justice, and the state of Texas did not voluntarily relinquish over his person a control and custody which it never acquired. * * “ ‘ * * * This arrangement of comity between the two governments works in no way to the prejudice of the prisoner or of either sovereignty.’ ””
    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.