McDonald v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
217 F.2d 619 · 1954
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2007 · most notably Jackson v. Taylor (1957), United States v. Liddy (1974)
20 federal appellate · 4 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 10 U.S.C. § 802 · 10 U.S.C. § 857 · 10 U.S.C. § 887a · 10 U.S.C. § 889 · 10 U.S.C. § 890 · 28 U.S.C. § 2106
Relies on Calder et Wife, v. Bull et Wife. · Burns v. Wilson · Zerbst v. Kidwell · Carter v. McClaughry · Boske v. Comingore
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A prisoner has some rights. A sentence of five years means a continuous sentence, unless interrupted by escape, violation of parole, or some fault of the prisoner, and he cannot be required to serve it in installments. Certainly a prisoner should have his chance to re-establish himself and live down his past.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If Article 57(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice envisioned so drastic a change in the system of military law as to provide that successive military sentences would in future run concurrently, it would seem that such purpose would have been alluded to in the voluminous hearings which accompanied enactment of the Uniform Code. No such purpose appears in the legislative history of the Act. Instead, it would seem that that article was devised simply to insure that prisoners receive credit for time served in confinement after sentence, while the record of trial is undergoing review as provided by the Code.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Edwards v. Madigan“Any period of confinement included in a sentence of a court-martial shall begin to run from the date the sentence is adjudged by the court-martial, but periods during which the sentence to confinement is suspended shall be excluded in computing the service of the term of confinement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Edwards v. Madigan
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.