Soper v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Actually, the names of two witnesses were endorsed on the indictment. However, the names of witnesses are not required to be endorsed on any indictment in the District Court for the Territory of Alaska. Such indictments need only conform to the requirements of Rule 7(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A. The indictment in this case did so conform. It should be noted and remembered that the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure are now, and have been since October 20, 1949, applicable to all criminal proceedings in the District Court for the Territory of Alaska. See Rule 54 (a) (1) of said rules, as amended by the Supreme Court’s order of December 28, 1948, 335 U.S. 953 , 954, effective October 20, 1949. Sections 66-8-52 and 66-11-1, Alaska Compiled Laws Annotated, 1949, cited by appellants, became inoperative on October 20, 1949, and remain inoperative.” [ 15 Alaska 475 , 220 F.2d 159 ]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 173 F. Supp. 206 - United States v. Egelak

2. “Failure by a party to raise defenses or objections or to make requests which must be made prior to trial, at the time set by the court pursuant to subdivision (c) or prior to any extension thereof made by the Court; shall constitute waiver thereof, but the court for cause shown may grant relief from the waiver.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 121 F. Supp. 2d 803 - United States v. Mariani