People v. Cade’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 3 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “directory” and thus the statutory mandate was met when the indictment was subsequently filed (see also, Dawson v People, 25 NY 399, 405-406 [indictment would have been valid if it remained in hands of court and was not filed]). Subdivision (2) of this statute gives no indication that, absent filing, the indictment is void of effect for purposes of removing jurisdiction from the criminal courts. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Chief Judge Kaye (dissenting). I agree with the majority that the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. People v. Brancoccio