Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 FRD 22 - United States v. Haug

United States v. Haug’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
April 2012
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2012

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

401957196019701980199020002010decided

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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 3282 · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Jencks v. United States · Bowman Dairy Co. v. United States · Henry Heide, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board · Thompson v. United States · Hupman 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a]n accused does not acquire any vested right in a statute of limitations until it has operated to bar the prosecution of the offense with which he has been charged. He may not complain if the statute of limitations is extended so long as the period of time originally provided therein had not run at the time of such extension.”
    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.