Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 227 U.S. 427 - Bartell v. United States

Bartell v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

227 U.S. 427 · 1913

Citation profile

290
cited by 290 later decisions
23
cited 23 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
November 2006
most recently cited

173 federal appellate · 23 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 290 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2006 · most notably Kotteakos v. United States (1946), Roth v. United States (1957)

173 federal appellate · 23 district · 29 state decisions

7501913192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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

Relies on United States v. Cruikshank · Bain Jr · Durland v. United States · Rosen v. United States · Dunbar 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 290 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““As to the objection that the charge was so indefinite that the accused could not plead the record and conviction in bar of another prosecution, it is sufficient to say that in such cases it is the right of the accused to resort to parol testimony to show the subject-matter of the former conviction, and such practice is not infrequently necessary.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““While it is true that ordinarily a document or writing essential to the charge of crime must be sufficiently described to make known its contents or the substance thereof, there is a well-recognized exception in the pleading of printed or written matter which is alleged to be too obscene or indecent to be spread upon the records of the court. It is well settled that such matter may be identified by a reference sufficient to advise the accused of the letter or document intended without setting forth its contents.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It is elementary that an indictment, in order to be good under the Federal Constitution and laws, shall advise the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, in order that he may meet the accusation and prepare for his trial, and that, after judgment, he may be able to plead the record and judgment in bar of further prosecution for the same offense.””
    2 later decisions 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.