Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 166 F.2d 673 - Grant v. Hunter

Grant v. Hunter’s Empirical Analysis

166 F.2d 673 · 1948

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably Gregory v. United States Government (1961), Alexander J. Woykovsky v. Richard A. Chappell, Chairman, U. S. Board of Parole (1964)

26 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

10019481950196019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 710

Relies on United States ex rel. Rowe v. Nicholson · Pagliaro v. Cox · Aderhold, Warden, v. Perry · Morgan v. Aderhold · Mills v. Aderhold

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

  1. “It is well settled that the imprisonment of one serving consecutive sentences is considered a single term, consisting of the aggregate of such sentences for the purpose of computing good time allowance. Under this construction of the statute, the credit for good time for good conduct does not accrue until such credit has been completely earned. Any good time deduction is contingent upon good conduct for the entire period of imprisonment until its allowance will end imprisonment. It follows, therefore, that all possible deduction for good time accredited to a prisoner serving consecutive sentences is destroyed by bad conduct even though such conduct occurs after one or more of the successive sentences has been served, (emphasis added)(footnotes omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “When two or more consecutive sentences are to be served, the aggregate of the several sentences shall be the basis upon which the [good time] deduction shall be computed.”
    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.