United States v. Moylan’s Empirical Analysis
417 F.2d 1002 · 1969
Citation profile
99 federal appellate · 4 district · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 159 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably United States v. Dellinger (1972), Cupp v. Commissioner (1975)
99 federal appellate · 4 district · 34 state decisions — followed in 19 states
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. § 1361 · 18 U.S.C. § 2071
Relies on Morissette v. United States · Screws v. United States · United States v. Murdock · Sparf v. United States · Capital Traction Co. v. Hof
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 159 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“From the earliest times when man chose to guide his relations with fellow men by allegiance to the rule of law rather than force, he has been faced with the problem how best to deal with the individual in society who through moral conviction concluded that a law with which he was confronted was unjust and therefore must not be followed. 8 Faced with the stark reality of injustice, men of sensitive conscience and great intellect have sometimes found only one morally justified path, and that path led them inevitably into conflict with established authority and its laws. Among philosophers and religionists throughout the ages there has been an incessant stream of discussion as to when, if at all, civil disobedience, whether by passive refusal to obey a law or by its active breach, is morally justified. However, they have been in general agreement that while in restricted circumstances a morally motivated act contrary to law may be ethically justified, the action must be non-violent and the actor must accept the penalty for his action. In other words, it is commonly conceded that the exercise of a moral judgment based upon individual standards does not carry with it legal justification or immunity from punishment for breach of the law.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence ... is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to them logic or passion, the juiy has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(Defendants) position was and is that since they acted from good motives, i. e., to protest a war which they sincerely believed was not only illegal but immoral, they could not have ‘willfully’ violated the statutes and must be acquitted. We agree with the interpretation of the trial judge. . . . The statutory requirement of willfulness is satisfied if the accused acted intentionally, with knowledge that he was breaching the statute. . (W)hatever motive may have led them to do the act is not relevant to the question of the violation of the statute . . . .””
4 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.