United States v. Cruz’s Empirical Analysis
285 F.3d 692 · 2002
Citation profile
87 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably United States v. Serrano-Lopez (2004), 374 Ill. App. 3d 409 - People v. Saxon (2007)
87 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. Brett · United States v. Schubel · United States v. Plenty Arrows · United States v. McCracken
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This standard of review is a strict one; we will not lightly overturn the jury's verdict.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Possession of contraband can be either actual or constructive. . We have held that an individual has constructive possession of contraband if he has ownership, dominion or control over the contraband itself, or dominion over the premises in which the contraband is concealed. Mere physical proximity to contraband is insufficient to convict a person of possession with intent to distribute. However, knowledge of presence combined with control over the thing is constructive possession. If there is knowledge, control is established by proof the person has dominion over the premises in which the contraband is concealed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt (1) the existence of an agreement to achieve some illegal purpose; (2) the defendant's knowledge of the agreement; and (3) the defendant's knowing participation in the conspiracy.”
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.