United States v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 2 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “. we take judicial notice that apparently operable revolvers and shotguns are “dangerous weapons” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 2114 . When such weapons are employed, as here, by pointing them at innocent persons and such pointing is accompanied by threats of death, absent compliance with illegal demands, such acts without more may constitute evidence from which a jury could properly infer that the persons against whom they were directed were placed “in jeopardy” within the meaning of the statute. Baker v. United States, 412 F.2d 1069 (5th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1018 , 90 S.Ct. 583 , 24 L.Ed.2d 509 (1970); United States v. Beverly, 416 F.2d 263 (9th Cir. 1969). We specifically reject the contention that this statute should be construed so as to put the burden of proof on the government of showing that such weapons were in fact operable and loaded during the course of the crime. The actual facts are, of course, peculiarly within the control of the perpetrators of the crime and peculiarly invulnerable to law enforcement investigation. In most instances (other than those where the bandits are captured on the scene), such interpretation would serve to render this section of the statute totally ineffective. We decline to attribute any such intent to Congress. Baker v. United States, supra.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kirk v. United States