Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 24 F.2d 100 - Holst v. Owens

Holst v. Owens’s Empirical Analysis

24 F.2d 100 · 1928

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
December 2009
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2009

3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

40192819301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Singer v. United States · Commonwealth v. McDermott · Biddle v. Thiele

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. “'It cannot legally be known that an offense has been committed until there has been a conviction. A second offense, as used in the criminal statutes, is one that has been committed after conviction for a first offense.' " Ibid. (quoting Holst v. Owens, 24 F.2d 100, 101 (CA5 1928)). 14 The present statute, however, does not use the term "offense,”
    5 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.