Rodman v. Pothier’s Empirical Analysis
264 U.S. 399 · 1924
Citation profile
97 federal appellate · 11 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 169 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2000 · most notably Bowen v. Johnston (1939), Sunal v. Large (1947)
97 federal appellate · 11 district · 22 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from First Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Holt v. United States · George Henry v. William Henkel · Benjamin Greene v. William Henkel · Louie 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 169 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Whether the locus of the alleged crime was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States demands consideration o£ many facts and seriously controverted questions of law. As heretofore often pointed out, these matters must be determined by the court where the indictment was found. The regular course may not be anticipated by alleging want of jurisdiction and demanding a ruling thereon in a habeas corpus proceeding. Barring certain exceptional cases (unlike the present one), this court ‘has uniformly held that the hearing on habeas corpus is not in the nature of a writ of error, nor is it intended as a substitute for the functions of the trial court. Manifestly, this is true as to disputed questions of fact, and it is equally as to disputed matters of law, whether they relate to the sufficiency of the indictment or the validity of the statute on which the charge is based. These and all other controverted matters of law and fact are for'the determination of the trial court.' Henry v. Henkel, 235 U. S. 219 , 229 [ 35 S. Ct. 54 , 59 L. Ed. 203 ]; Louie v. U. S., 254 U. S. 548 [ 41 S. Ct. 188 , 65 L. Ed. 399 ].””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bowen v. Johnston · Sell v. Rustad“Whether the location of the alleged crime was upon the high seas and exclusively within the jurisdiction of the United States required consideration of many facts and seriously controverted questions of law, including the alleged error involving the jurisdiction of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bowen v. Johnston
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.