Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 353 Mo. 919 - Jackson v. Kaiser

Jackson v. Kaiser’s Empirical Analysis

1945

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
May 2010
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2010

21 state decisions

10019451950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Ponzi v. Fessenden · White v. Pearlman · Smith v. Swope · Zerbst v. McPike · Lunsford v. Hudspeth

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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ . . . The marshal had control of the petitioner all during the trial in the Circuit Court. By the writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, the Circuit Court’s custody of the petitioner was placed in the marshal. In re Grant, 26 Wash. 412 , 67 P. 73 . “We hold that the Circuit Court never did obtain full and exclusive custody of the petitioner during his trial for robbery, but its custody of the petitioner during this trial was subject to the prior custody of the District Court which already had custody of him. As said in the Zerbst case, supra, the Federal Government ‘lent’ the petitioner to the State for the limited purpose of trial in that court. It follows that since the Circuit Court did not have full and exclusive custody of the petitioner, it did not waive its right to have its judgment and sentence executed by returning him to the United States marshal at the conclusion of the trial in that court.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.