United States v. Cefaratti’s Empirical Analysis
202 F.2d 13 · 1952
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 1 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2006 · most notably Di Bella v. United States (1962), Carroll v. United States (1957)
46 federal appellate · 1 district · 10 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Cobbledick v. United States · Burdeau v. McDowell
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if this [suppression] order is reversed before the statute of limitations runs, the government plans to reindict the appellee and try him.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““After indictment and before trial, an order denying a defendant’s motion to suppress is not final and not appealable. Cogen v. United States, 278 U.S. 221 , 49 S.Ct. 118 , 73 L.Ed. 275 . Such an order has no ‘final and irreparable effect on the rights of the parties.’ The motion may bo renewed at trial; it may then be granted; and if it is then denied and the defendant is convicted, the denial may be reviewed on appeal from the conviction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““An order that does not ‘terminate an action’ but is, on the contrary, made in the course of an action, has the finality that § 1291 requires for an appeal if (1) it has a ‘final and irreparable effect on the rights of the parties’, being ‘a final disposition of a claimed right’; (2) it is ‘too important to be denied review’; and (3) the claimed right ‘is not an ingredient of the cause of action and does not require consideration with it’ ””
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.