Olive v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
327 F.2d 646 · 1964
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on MacHibroda v. United States · Massengale v. United States · Johnson v. United States · United States v. Thomas
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“h= * * * * * “What has been said is not to imply that a movant must always be allowed to appear in a district court for a full hearing if the record does not conclusively and expressly belie .his claim, no matter how vague, conclusory, or palpably incredible his allegations may be. The language of the statute does not strip the district courts of all discretion -to exercise their common sense. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Robbins“without requiring the personal presence of the prisoner.” The district courts are left”
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.