Reed v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
401 F.2d 756 · 1968
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Klingler v. United States (1969), United States v. Harflinger (1970)
44 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 state decisions
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 26 U.S.C. § 5841 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5851 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Draper v. United States · Ker v. State of California
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In this setting, the defendant’s invocation of his privilege against self-incrimination is not well taken, since his offense derived not from his own failure to comply with the making provisions but rather from his possession of the firearm illegally made by others. We do not believe the Supreme Court intended that its holding in Haynes should be applied to a situation where, as here, the defendant was under no statutory command to and did not in fact supply any self-incriminating information.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““According to the evidence the formal declaration was made contemporaneous with or immediately after the shotgun was seized. ‘An arrest to be effective does not require formal words of arrest or stationhouse bookkeeping.’ United States v. Hensley, 374 F.2d 341 , 348 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 388 U.S. 923 , 87 S.Ct. 2139 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1373 (1967).” 401 F.2d at 761.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Any statement of the statutes which I have read to you to the effect that proof of possession by the defendant of a firearm which has not been registered as required by law shall be deemed sufficient evidence to authorize a conviction, unless the defendant explains such possession, must still be understood by you as subject to the general rule that the defendant must be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The effect of this statement in the statute is only to place upon the defendant the burden of producing evidence to explain how his possession of the firearm is an innocent possession, but it does not require him to prove such facts beyond a reasonable doubt nor even by a preponderance of the evidence.””
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.