Tedesco v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
255 F.2d 35 · 1958
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1979
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 18 U.S.C. § 1401
Relies on Crowell v. Benson · Edwin Hale v. William Henkel · Counselman v. Hitchcock · United States v. Murdock · Brown v. Walker
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * This court has held that immunity against state prosecution is not essential to the validity of federal statutes declaring that a witness shall not be excused from giving evidence on the ground that it will incriminate him, and also that the lack of state power to give witnesses protection against federal prosecution does not defeat a state immunity statute. The principle established is that full and complete immunity against prosecution by the government compelling the witness to answer is equivalent to the protection furnished by the rule against compulsory self-incrimination. Counselman v. Hitchcock, 142 U.S. 547 , 12 S.Ct. 195 , 35 L.Ed. 1110 ; Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. 591, 606 , 16 S.Ct. 644 , 40 L.Ed. 819 . Jack v. Kansas, 199 U.S. 372, 381 , 26 S.Ct. 73 , 50 L.Ed. 234 . Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 68 , 26 S.Ct. 370 , 50 L.Ed. 652 . * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * no such witness shall be prosecuted or subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any transaction, matter, or thing concerning which he is compelled, after having claimed his privilege against self-incrimination, to testify or produce evidence, nor shall testimony so compelled be used as evidence in any criminal proceeding (except prosecution described in the next sentence) against him in any court. No witness shall be exempt under this section from prosecution for perjury or contempt committed while giving testimony or producing evidence under compulsion as provided in this section.””
1 later decision 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.