Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 F.2d 982 - United States v. Koch

United States v. Koch’s Empirical Analysis

113 F.2d 982 · 1940

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
February 2012
most recently cited

56 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently February 2012 · most notably United States v. Borelli (1964), United States v. Agueci (1962)

56 federal appellate ·

19019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. Peoni · United States v. Bruno · United States v. De Vasto · United States v. Smith · United States v. Mascuch

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

  1. “The purchase of the cocaine from Mauro was not enough to prove a conspiracy in which Mauro and the appellant participated. They had no agreement to advance any joint in terest. The appellant bought at a stated price and was under no obligation to Mauro except to pay him that price. The purchase alone was insufficient to prove the appellant a conspirator with Mauro and those who were his co-conspirators.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he amount of the cocaine purchased [170 ounces] would, of course, indicate that it was taken not for personal consumption alone but for resale”). 27 . See United States v. Boidi, 568 F.3d 24 , 30 (1st Cir.2009) (”
    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.