Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 F.2d 541 - Farnsworth v. Zerbst

Farnsworth v. Zerbst’s Empirical Analysis

98 F.2d 541 · 1938

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
November 2012
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2012 · most notably North Carolina v. Alford (1970), United States v. Goodwin (1974)

25 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

170193819401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Johnson v. Zerbst · United States v. William Rabinowich · United States v. Clara Holte · Riddle v. Dyche · Sims v. Rives

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

  1. ““(8-11) The indictment is sufficient to support the sentence. What are the essentials of the crime sought to be charged and whether they have been sufficiently set forth in the accusation are questions for the trial court, and because of the review of the record which the judge is obliged to make before pronouncing sentence, they are adjudicated when he sentences. They are ordinarily not reviewable on habeas corpus. Aderhold v. Hugart, 5 Cir.,- 67 F.2d 247 . The habeas corpus court can say that no crime was charged and consequently the imprisonment is unlawful only when it is plain that there is no law to punish the sort of conduct charged.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a better presentation of it on another petition, since res judicata is not strictly applied in habeas corpus cases.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the representatives, officers and agents of the Imperial Japanese Government.”
    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.