Howard v. Fleming’s Empirical Analysis
191 U.S. 126 · 1903
Citation profile
76 federal appellate · 12 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 241 later decisions (27 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2018 · most notably Furman v. Georgia (1972), Ingraham v. Wright (1977)
76 federal appellate · 12 district · 52 state decisions — followed in 16 states
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 Allen v. United States · Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Chicago Co v. City of Chicago · Royall · Coffin v. United States
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 241 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Undue leniency in one case does not transform reasonable punishment in another case to a cruel one.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilson v. Cox · Andrus v. Turner““The -highest court of the state has affirmed the validity of the proceedings in that trial, and we may not. interfere with its judgment unless some right guaranteed by the federal Constitution was denied and the proper steps taken to preserve for onr consideration the question of that denial. The first -contention demanding notice is that the indictment charged no crime. As found, it contained three counts; but the two latter were abandoned, and therefore the inquiry is limited to the sufficiency of the first. That charged a conspiracy to defraud. There is in North Carolina no statute defining_ or .punishing such a crime; but the Supreme Court held that it was a common-law offense, and as such cognizable in the courts “of the state. In other words, the Supreme Court decided that a conspiracy to defraud was a crime punishable under the laws of the state, and that the indictment sufficiently -charged the offense. Whether there be such an offense is not a federal question, and the decision of the Supreme Court is conclusive upon the matter. Neither are we at liberty to inquire whether the indictment sufficiently charged the offense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Erickson v. Hodges
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.