United States v. Vanover’s Empirical Analysis
339 F.2d 987 · 1965
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1732
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Blumenthal v. United States · United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc. · Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Krueger v. United States
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““You will bear in mind that the law never imposes upon a defendant in a criminal ease the burden or duty of calling any witnesses or producing any evidence. However, possession may be satisfactorily explained by facts and circumstances in evidence, independent of any testimony or other evidence from a defendant. It is your duty to determine whether the facts and circumstances shown by the evidence warrant any inference which the law permits you to draw from possession of recently stolen property. If any possession a defendant may have had of recently stolen property is consistent with innocence, then you should acquit such defendant.””
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.