Scheve v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
184 F.2d 695 · 1950
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Baker v. United States (1968), United States v. Roselli (1970)
40 federal appellate · 16 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 Pointer v. United States · McElroy v. United States · United States v. Antonelli Fireworks Co. · United States v. Gottfried · United States v. Lotsch
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]here was an unbroken chain of causation between the defendants’ gambling business, Ricker’s losses, his wife’s demand for return of some of them, Joseph Scheve’s assault on her, Ricker’s apparent attempt to intervene, and Scheve’s assault on Ricker. Since the gambling and the assault were ‘acts or transactions connected together’, Rule 8(a) permits joinder of the offenses in one indictment. Since the gambling and the assault were a ‘series of acts or transactions’ in which series, if not in each of its members, all four defendants ‘participated’, Rule 8(b) permits joinder of the defendants in one indictment.” p. 696. “Since Rule 8(b) expressly provides that ‘all of the defendants need not be charged in each count’, the fact that the present appellants were not charged with assault did not prevent joinder.” p. 697.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Tate““Joinder of Offenses. Two or more offenses may be charged in the same indictment or information in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged, whether felonies or misdemeanors or both, are of the same or similar character or are based on the same act or transaction or on two or more acts or transactions connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““If it appears that a defendant or the government is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or separate trials of counts, grant a severance of defendants or provide whatever other relief justice requires.””
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.