United States v. Briddle’s Empirical Analysis
430 F.2d 1335 · 1970
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently June 2007 · most notably 957 So. 2d 1280 - State v. MacOn (2007), United States v. Conner (1973)
33 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on McNally v. Hill · Brady v. United States · Maloy v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of West Palm Beach · Nebraska v. Iowa · Gurleski 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(h) It shall be unlawful for any person— (1) who is under indictment for, or who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) who is a fugitive from justice; (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to marihuana or any depressant or stimulant drug (as defined in section 201 (v) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) or narcotic drug (as defined in section 4731(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954) ; or (4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has. been committed to any mental institution; to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. (j) It shall be unlawful for any person to receive, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, or pledge or accept as security for a loan any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, which is moving as, which is a part of, or which constitutes, interstate or foreign commerce, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Just as the prosecution need not generally divulge the name of an informer unless some materiality is shown, they need not reveal the location of these marks which are a highly valuable tool to law enforcement officers in discovering and solving car thefts. Gurleski v. United States, 405 F.2d 253, 266 (5th Cir.1968); see also, United States v. Briddle, 430 F.2d 1335, 1341 (8th Cir.1970); Williamson v. United States, 272 F.2d 495, 497 (5th Cir.1960); United States v. Simmons, 457 F.2d 763 (9th Cir.1972).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * we must, as an appellate court, view that evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury verdict, and we accept as established all reasonable inferences that tend to support the jury’s determination. United States v. Lodwick, 8 Cir., 1969, 410 F.2d 1202 ; Kayser v. United States, 8 Cir., 1968, 394 F.2d 601 , cert. denied 393 U.S. 919 , 89 S.Ct. 250 , 21 L.Ed.2d 206 .” United States v. Briddle, supra, 430 F.2d 1335 , at 1337-1338.”
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.