Jackson v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis
1946
Citation profile
5 district · 77 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Case v. State of Nebraska (1965), State v. Archbold (1984)
5 district · 77 state decisions
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 Yakus v. United States · Frank v. Mangum · Smith v. O'Grady · Salinger v. Loisel · Sawyer
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To release a person from a sentence of imprisonment by habeas corpus, it must appear that the sentence was absolutely void. Habeas corpus will not lie to discharge a person from a sentence of penal servitude where the court imposing the sentence had jurisdiction of the offense, had jurisdiction of the person of the defendant, and the sentence was within the power of the court to impose. Such a judgment is not void.” Jackson v. Olson, 146 Neb. 885 , 22 N.W.2d 124, at pp. 129-130 , 165 A.L.R. 932 (1946).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Where an information charges the crime of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree and manslaughter are included in the charge, the degree ordinarily being for the jury; and where the evidence and circumstances of the killing are such that different inferences may properly be drawn therefrom as to the degree, the court should submit the different degrees to the jury for them to draw the inference.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keithley““ [I]t is settled by the decisions of this court that... there is nothing in the Constitution, treaties or laws of the United States which exempts an offender, brought before the courts of a State for an offence against its laws, from trial and punishment, even though brought from another State by unlawful violence, or by abuse of legal process.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ferrell
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.