Page v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
282 F.2d 807 · 1960
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably State v. Long (1978), United States v. Byers (1984)
51 federal appellate · 6 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.
Relationships
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Draper v. United States · Weeks v. United States · United States v. Rabinowitz
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are convinced that the exercise of a sound judicial discretion requires that, in the instant cases, we decline to pass upon the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act requiring the registration by possessors, such as Page, of sawed-off shotguns — useless for any lawful purpose. The constitutional question has been ably briefed. If the Act, in so far as applicable here, is to be declared invalid, that should, we think, be done by the Supreme Court on certiorari — so that the declaration will have nationwide effect and acceptance. The Act in question has thus far stood up well under attack (United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 , 59 S.Ct. 816 , 83 L.Ed. 1206 ; Sonzinsky v. United States, 300 U.S. 506 , 57 S.Ct. 554 , 81 L.Ed. 772 ) and is certainly not so plainly unconstitutional (United States v. Cumbee, D.C. Minn., 84 F.Supp. 390 , 392) that the failure of the trial court or this Court to hold it so can be regarded as a plain error or a culpable neglect of judicial duty.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““But the power of a reviewing court to consider a question first presented on appeal is an exception to the rule that such a court will not consider errors not objected to at the trial. Lamento v. United States, 8 Cir., 4 F.2d 901 , 904. A trial judge ordinarily should not be held to have erred in not deciding correctly a question that he was never asked to decide.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Plain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Houser
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.