Sullens v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
409 F.2d 545 · 1969
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2001 · most notably United States v. Jefferson (1983), Chandler v. United States (1972)
26 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
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. § 3651 · 18 U.S.C. § 875 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Ex parte Lange · Bozza v. United States · United States v. Benz · In re Bonner · King 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ . . . The Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by a judge means immunity for the prisoner. See King v. United States, 69 App.D.C. 10 , 98 F.2d 291 , 296. In this case the court ‘only set aside what it had no authority to do, and substitute[d] directions required by law to be done upon conviction of the offender.’ In re Bonner, supra, 151 U.S. [242] at page 260, 14 S.Ct. [323] at page 327, 38 L.Ed. 149 . It did not twice put the petitioner in jeopardy for the same offense. The sentence, as corrected imposes a valid punishment for an offense instead of an invalid punishment for that offense.” Bozza v. United States, 330 U.S. 160 , 167, 67 S.Ct. 645 , 649, 91 L.Ed. 818 , 822 (1947). “Concededly, in the present case, as in Bozza, the prisoner had begun to serve an illegal punishment. In Bozza, however, the court had no choice under the statute but to increase the sentence, because the original penalty had been too light. The conflict between Lange, which forbids a heavier punishment, and the statute, which required it, could not be resolved. If an exception was not made to Lange, no legal sentence could be imposed . . ..” Sullens v. United States, supra, 409 F.2d at page 548.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * This Court has rejected the 'doctrine that a prisoner, whose guilt is established, by a regular verdict, is to escape punishment altogether, because the court committed an error in passing the sentence.’ * * * The Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for-the prisoner. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Allen
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.