Earl Earnest Scott v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
434 F.2d 11 · 1970
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably United States v. Villano (1987), United States v. Khoury (1990)
55 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 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
Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Ekberg v. United States · Schnautz v. Beto · Baca 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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is beyond the power of any judge ... to vary the terms of ... § 3568, which provides that the sentence of imprisonment ... shall commence to run from the date on which such person is received at the penitentiary.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"This Court holds that the mere lapse of time that occurred here, without petitioner undergoing any actual imprisonment to which he was sentenced by Judge Clayton, does not constitute service of that sentence, and this sentence remains subject to be executed, notwithstanding the delay in executing it. This is definitely the ruling of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of United States ex rel. Mayer v. Loisel, 25 F.2d 300 , with annotation to the same effect in 98 A.L.R.2d 688 , which recognizes the general rule that delay in executing sentence of imprisonment does not ordinarily preclude subsequent enforcement of the sentence. That is peculiarly appropriate in those cases where the convicted party had himself been instrumental in causing the delay in execution or where the delay was occasioned by appeal or purported appeal in connection with legal proceedings." 434 F.2d at 23.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The law is well settled that if there were any conflict between the oral pronouncement of judgment and the written judgment itself, the terms of the oral pronouncement would control. So, if the two conflict, the oral pronouncement controls. On the other hand, there may be no conflict but simply an ambiguity. The actual intention of the sentencing judge is to be ascertained both by what he said from the bench and by the terms of the order he signed, or from his total acts.”
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.