United States v. Peeples’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. ““However, if the jury is instructed to consider proof of possession as conclusive proof of guilt rather than as merely proof from which to draw permissible inferences in order to find from the proven fact the two remaining essential facts that must be proven in order to establish the commission of the offense, the statute would be misconstrued into creating a new federal crime of possession which might be of dubious constitutionality.” (citing authorities.)”

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

2. “Whenever on trial for a violation of this section the defendant is shown to have or to have had possession of the narcotic drug, such possession shall be deemed sufficient evidence to authorize conviction unless the defendant explains the possession to the satisfaction of the jury. 21 U.S.C. § 174 (emphasis supplied).”

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

3. “to acquit [the] defendant if satisfied that the defendant did not know the narcotic was imported.”

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