United States v. Debrow’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
1,056 federal appellate · 124 district · 86 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,600 later decisions (21 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Hamling v. United States (1974), United States v. Dunnigan (1993)
1,056 federal appellate · 124 district · 86 state decisions — followed in 22 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States v. Debrow (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Hagner v. United States · Rosen v. United States · Cochran v. United States · Rosenberg v. United States
Cited together with Hagner v. United States · Russell v. United States · Hamling v. United States · Glasser v. United States · Cochran 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 1,600 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'in case any other proceedings are taken against him for a similar offense, whether the record shows with accuracy to what extent he may plead a former acquittal or conviction.' Cochran and Sayre v. United States, 157 U.S. 286 , 290 (15 S.Ct. 628, 39 L.Ed. 704); Rosen v. United States, 161 U.S. 29 , 34 (16 S.Ct. 434, 40 L.Ed. 606).”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(c) Nature and Contents. “The indictment or the information shall be a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged. * * * ””
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The charges of the indictments followed substantially the wording of the statute, which embodies all the elements of the crime, and such charges clearly informed the defendants of that with which they were accused, so as to enable them to prepare their defense and to plead the judgment in bar of any further prosecutions for the same offense. It is inconceivable to us how the defendants could possibly be misled as to the offense with which they stood charged. The sufficiency of the indictment is not a question of whether it could have been more definite and certain. * * * ””
11 later decisions 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.