United States v. Corbett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

56 federal appellate · 7 district · 30 state decisions

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 170 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““But the argument is that, however cogent may be the considerations just stated, they are here inapplicable, because the statute is a criminal one, requiring to be strictly construed. The principle is elementary, but the application here sought to be made is a mistaken one. The rule of strict construction does not require that the narrowest technical meaning be given to the words employed in a criminal statute, in disregard of their context and in frustration of the obvious legislative intent. United States v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. 385 [ 18 L. Ed. 830 ]. In that case, answering the contention that penal laws are to be construed strictly, the court said (page 395): “ ‘The object in construing penal as well as other statutes is to ascertain the legislative intent. * * * The words must not be narrowed to the exclusion of what the Legislature intended to embrace; but that intention must be gathered from the words, and they must be such as to leave no room for a reasonable doubt upon the subject. * * * The rule of strict construction is not violated by permitting the words of the statute to have their full meaning, or the more extended of two meanings, as the wider popular, instead of the more narrow technical, one; but the words should be taken in such a sense, bent neither one way nor the other, as will best manifest the legislative intent.’ “It is to be observed that the rule thus stated affords no ground for extending a penal statute beyond its plain meaning. But it inculcates tha”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. First Nat. Bank of Anamoose · United States v. Kambeitz

2. ““The rule of strict construction does not require that the narrowest technical meaning be given to the words employed in a criminal statute in disregard of their context and in frustration of the obvious legislative intent.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Don Kee · Botsford v. United States