Carter v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
306 F.2d 283 · 1962
Citation profile
118 federal appellate · 6 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 217 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2006 · most notably Dorszynski v. United States (1974), 17 Cal. 3d 236 - People v. Olivas (1976)
118 federal appellate · 6 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 5010
Relies on Cunningham v. United States · United States v. Lo Duca
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 217 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he basic theory of [the] Act is rehabilitative and in a sense this rehabilitation may be regarded as comprising the quid pro quo for a longer confinement but under different conditions and terms than a defendant would undergo in an ordinary prison.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“confinement cannot be equated with incarceration in an ordinary prison.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ralston v. Robinson“in lieu of the penalty of imprisonment otherwise provided by law.”
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.