United States v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
562 F.2d 232 · 1977
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 4 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2011 · most notably United States v. Johnson (1992), Taylor v. United States (1992)
19 federal appellate · 4 district · 13 state decisions — followed in 11 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.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 18 U.S.C. § 4002 · 18 U.S.C. § 4082 · 18 U.S.C. § 5003 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Commissioner v. Brown · Carbo v. United States · Ex Parte Bollman and Ex Parte Swartwout · Pendleton and Webb v. Wambersie and Others
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) The appropriate officer of the jurisdiction in which an untried indictment, information or complaint is pending shall be entitled to have a prisoner against whom he has lodged a detainer and who is serving a term of imprisonment in any party State made available . . . upon presentation of a written request for temporary custody or availability to the appropriate authorities of the State in which the prisoner is incarcerated. . . . * * * * (c) [T]rial shall be commenced within 120 days of the arrival of the prisoner in the receiving State, but for good cause shown in open court, the prisoner or his counsel being present, the court having jurisdiction of the matter may grant any necessary or reasonable continuance. * * * * (e) If trial is not had on any indictment, information or complaint contemplated hereby prior to the prisoner's being returned to the original place of imprisonment . . ., such indictment, information or complaint shall not be of any further force or effect, and the court shall enter an order dismissing the same with prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In whose 'custody' is a person who has been convicted of state offenses but who is confined in a federal facility pursuant to a contract between the respective jurisdictions? Under 18 U.S.C. § 5003(a), the 'custody,' care etc. of such persons is committed to the Attorney General of the United States. But I would suspect that most states would regard all persons imprisoned for state offenses as being in state 'custody.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Beshaw v. Fenton“where the Federal Government is trying a state prisoner serving his state sentence within the geographical limits of the state in which the federal district court is located.”
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.