Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 382 F.2d 965 - Aron v. United States

Aron v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

382 F.2d 965 · 1967

Citation profile

109
cited by 109 later decisions
15
states following
September 1983
most recently cited

67 federal appellate · 2 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently September 1983 · most notably United States v. Lucarz (1970), United States v. Cox (1971)

67 federal appellate · 2 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 15 states

740196719701980decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1

Relies on United States v. Ventresca · Weeks v. United States · Harris v. United States · Marron v. United States · Giordenello 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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The doctrine that possession of recently stolen property gives a permissible inference of knowledge on the part of the possessor that the property had been stolen, unless the possession thereof is accounted for in a reasonable and satisfactory manner consistent with the circumstances of the possession, is a factually sound and a necessary evidentiary rule. Without this evidentiary rule in criminal cases it would be almost impossible to consider for conviction any of the possessors or fences of stolen property unless they admitted that they knew the property to be stolen, which is an admission not likely to be forthcoming.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]hat where an officer is proceeding lawfully and making a valid search under a properly issued search warrant and comes upon evidence of another crime being committed in his presence, he is entitled to seize the fruits thereof and testify to the violation he saw committed in his presence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In applying the rule respecting possession of recently stolen property the length of possession along with all the other facts and circumstances must be considered, as the type and kind of property, the amount or volume thereof, the ease or difficulty with which it may be assimilated into legitimate trade channels, including the circumstances under which the property is alleged to have been acquired.””
    2 later decisions 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.