Joseph N. D'Argento and James A. Caparusso v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

42 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There [Milanovich] the defendant was charged with larceny and with receiving the same property taken. The distinction between that case and this one is that the second offense here is the possession of the stolen goods. The two offenses of larceny and the receiving of the stolen property would occur at the same time and would tend to merge. Here possession of the stolen property would be a continuing offense. No cases have been called to our attention holding that possession and receiving in this context are entitled to the same treatment. We do not consider Milanovich supra to be applicable here. There are two distinct offenses of theft and possession. “There was no error in not requiring the Government to elect or in failing to instruct that there was only one offense.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Tyler

2. “An illegal arrest may prevent the use of evidence seized for that particular offense for which the arrest was made but the identity of the person, his description, the description of his car and its license number are all matters that are observable to an alert intelligent officer, (p. 333)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 73 Wash. 2d 596 - State v. Rothenberger

3. “The Government is entitled to all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Epperson