United States v. Sanges’s Empirical Analysis
144 U.S. 310 · 1892
Citation profile
182 federal appellate · 12 district · 162 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 516 later decisions (100 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Green v. United States (1957), United States v. Cotton (2002)
182 federal appellate · 12 district · 162 state decisions — followed in 35 states
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 Cannon v. United States · United States v. Cruikshank · 'The Ku-Klux Cases' Yarbrough · United States v. Reese · United States v. Carll
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 516 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . .so serious and far-reaching an innovation in the criminal jurisprudence of the United States” United States v. Sanges, 144 U.S. 310, 323 , 12 S.Ct. 609, 614 , 36 L.Ed. 445 (1892),”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t is settled by an overwhelming weight of American authority that the state has no right to sue out a writ of error upon a judgment in favor of the defendant in a criminal case, except under and in accordance with express statutes, whether that judgment was rendered upon a verdict of acquittal, or upon the determination by the court of a question of law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. . . .”
2 later decisions 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.