Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 833 F.2d 69 - United States v. Bratcher

United States v. Bratcher’s Empirical Analysis

833 F.2d 69 · 1987

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
1
states following
May 2017
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably United States of America v. Fabien Miguel Jolivette (2001), United States v. Barry Chaffen (1988)

39 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

2801987199020002010decided

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. § 3162 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Abney v. United States · Cobbledick v. United States · United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.

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

  1. “Final judgment in a criminal case means sentence. The sentence is the judgment.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The Cohen exception permits interlocutory appeals in only two situations in criminal prosecutions: (1) there may be immediate appeals from orders denying motions to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds (Abney) and (2) there may be immediate appeals from orders denying motions to reduce bail before trial (Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (1952)).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he testing of the effect of the dismissal order must abide petitioner's trial, and only then if convicted, will he have been aggrieved.”
    2 later decisions 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.