Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 F.2d 563 - United States v. Raysor

United States v. Raysor’s Empirical Analysis

294 F.2d 563 · 1961

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
2
states following
December 1983
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 1983 · most notably United States v. Kenny (1972), Commonwealth v. MacOlino (1983)

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

140196119701980decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2111

Relies on Berger v. United States · Stirone v. United States · Harris v. United States · Cellino v. United States · United States v. Sawyer

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

  1. “We note that there is no merit to the contention advanced by the defendant Raysor * * * that his `possession' of the narcotics sold was not established by `direct evidence' and that his conviction must be reversed for that reason. Our holding in United States v. Malfi, 3 Cir., 1959, 264 F.2d 147 that `possession' may be established by circumstantial evidence is dispositive here. Other circuits are in accord: Cellino v. United States, 9 Cir., 1960, 276 F.2d 941 ; United States v. Pinna, 7 Cir., 1956, 229 F.2d 216 ; United States v. Pisano, 7 Cir., 1951, 193 F.2d 355 , 31 A.L.R.2d 409.”
    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.