Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 164 KAN 471 - Tines v. Hudspeth

Tines v. Hudspeth’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
May 1991
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 1991

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

80194819501960197019801990decided

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 Salinger v. Loisel · Wong Doo v. United States · Crebs v. Hudspeth · Honaker v. United States · State v. Woodrow

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

  1. ““. . . Under numerous decisions, within the meaning of such terms as used in the constitution and the criminal code, a person is ‘charged with crime’ where prosecution has been initiated, pursued to judgment of conviction and sentence has not expired (18 U. S. C. A., § 662, note 22; U. S. C. A. [Const.], art. 4, §2, clause 2, note 9). He is also a ‘fugitive from justice.’ (18 U. S. C. A., § 662, note 8; U. S. C. A. [Const.], art. 4, § 2, clause 2, note 15.)””
    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.