People v. Leyva’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 15 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Legislatures have been somewhat loose in their use of the word “presumption” when an inference is clearly what is intended, thus leading to a good deal of unnecessary confusion. Permissible inferences, based on specified underlying facts which must first be proven before the inference may be drawn, should be distinguished carefully from those rules of jurisprudence which operate simply to place the burden of proof (as an affirmative defense is placed upon a defendant) or which describe basic value judgments of our system (as the rule that defendants are to be “presumed” innocent until proven guilty or the “presumption” against suicide). It is only such rules, rather than statutorily authorized inferences, which carry a requirement that the jury be told that, if it finds the facts in doubt, it must follow the “presumption”. [Citations omitted.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Brighter · Lopez Garcia v. Curry

2. “A jury is not to be told that it Must find defendants guilty if the prosecution proves that they and drugs were present in a car together; it is only to be told that it May so find.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lopez Garcia v. Curry

3. “is presumptive evidence of knowing possession thereof by each and every person in the automobile at the time such controlled substance was found.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Lopez Garcia v. Curry