Sandroff v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
174 F.2d 1014 · 1949
Citation profile
19 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 2007 · most notably Holdridge v. United States (1960), United States v. Barnes (1991)
19 federal appellate ·
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. § 3237 · 28 U.S.C. § 103
Relies on Hyde v. Shine · American Tobacco Co. v. United States · George v. United States · Tuckerman v. United States · United States v. Offutt
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Before imposing sentence the court shall afford the defendant an opportunity to make a statement in his own behalf and to present any informátion in mitigation of punishment.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““While it would have been in appropriate conformity with the above rule had the district judge asked appellant Sandroff whether he desired to make a statement, it would appear from his inaction that Sandroff did not wish to do so. Though the judge posed the query, ‘Anything further?’, neither appellant nor his attorney spoke up to the effect that Sandroff wished to be heard or to present information in mitigation of punishment. We cannot say that appellant was not afforded an opportunity to make a statement. There is nothing to indicate that he was shut off. * * * ””
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.