Moore v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 federal appellate · 6 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Circumstantial evidence may support a verdict of guilty, though it does not exclude every reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence. Holland v. United States, 1954, 348 U.S. 121 , 75 S.Ct. 127 , 99 L.Ed. 150 . If it be sufficient to support an inference of guilt and the defendant fails to offer a reasonable explanation consistent with innocence, such failure may be consider ed by the trier of fact. Wilson v. United States, 1896, 162 U.S. 613 , 16 S.Ct. 895 , 40 L.Ed. 1090 ; Jenkins v. United States, 4 Cir., 1932, 58 F.2d 556 . It is not necessary, in appraising the sufficiency of the evidence, that this court be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant. Bell v. United States, 4 Cir., 1950, 185 F.2d 302 . The question is whether the evidence, construed most favorably for the prosecution, is such that a jury (or trial judge) might find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Bell v. United States, supra; United States v. Brown, 2 Cir., 1956, 236 F.2d 403 ; Stoppelli v. United States, 9 Cir., 1950, 183 F.2d 391 .””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Ragland · United States v. Walker

2. “but evidence creating a mere probability of guilt or giving rise to a mere suspicion or conjecture of guilt is not sufficient.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Walter Freeman and John Charles Russell · United States v. Walter Freeman and John Charles Russell