Culbert v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
325 F.2d 920 · 1964
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 7237 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on United States v. Glass · Ketcherside v. United States · United States v. Hoskins · United States v. Lott
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * We have carefully examined all the files, papers and records from the inception of the criminal charges, and we are satisfied that appellant is on a fishing expedition — he desires a transcript at Government expense with some vague hope of discovering a flaw in the proceedings which would entitle him to make collateral attack upon the judgment. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Harris v. Nebraska
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.