United States v. Oates’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““Conceding, for the purpose of the question presented on this appeal, that the commissioner, as ex officio justice of the peace, committed error in the manner of impaneling and selecting the jury which convicted the petitioner, it was an error committed within and not in excess of his jurisdiction. The remedy was by appeal or writ of error, and not by habeas corpus. “In appellant’s brief appears the statement that ‘but one decision’ was found ‘in which the judgment of a Justice of the Peace is attempted to be reviewed by a writ of habeas corpus, and that is in Ex parte Winston, 9 Nev. 71 ,’ and the following from the opinion is quoted: “ ‘In the case under consideration, the justice of the peace has not exceeded his jurisdiction. By the express provisions of the statute, * * * the justice of the peace-has original jurisdiction of the subject matter. It was his duty to decide whether or not the law of 1861 had been repealed by implication or otherwise. In no other way could the question be raised. Such was the subject matter with which he had to deal. That he had jurisdiction to determine this question cannot be denied. Such being the fact, his judgment may be erroneous but it cannot be void. If the justice erred, petitioner has his remedy by appeal to the district court. The judgment of the justice is conclusive until reversed. It cannot be reviewed upon habeas corpus.’ “While the Winston case, opinion by Justice Hawley, who later became United States District Judge, is one o”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Jorge

2. ““No case, either civil or criminal, shall be tried in any of the Courts of the Territory of Alaska, except in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and any violation of the provisions of this Act is hereby declared to be reversible error.” Sec. 10, Ch. 100, Session Laws of Alaska, 1931.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Jorge