Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 465 F.2d 451 - United States v. Cooper

United States v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis

465 F.2d 451 · 1973

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
October 1986
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113

Relies on International Ass'n of Machinists v. Duckworth · Davis v. United States · Mims v. United States · Wade v. United States · Dusky 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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Mental disease or defect excluding responsibility. (a) A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if at the time of the conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law. (b) Reliance on mental disease or defect as excluding responsibility is an affirmative defense. The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not require the prosecution to disprove an affirmative defense unless and until there is evidence supporting the defense. The requirement of evidence supporting the affirmative defense is not satisfied solely by evidence of an abnormality which is manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct. (c) If the defendant is acquitted on the ground of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility, the verdict and the judgment shall so state. (d) When a person offers a defense based on mental disease or defect excluding responsibility for his criminal conduct, he may waive a jury trial without the consent of the state.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The affirmative evidence is limited to this: Cooper could go through the motions to rob a bank, he could run, he appeared alert, his speech was intelligible, and he was relaxed and friendly. Grossly psychotic patients can perform all of these acts and maintain all of these appearances. Although this testimony may constitute some evidence bearing on sanity, it cannot be escalated to proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Cooper was sane. 465 F.2d at 455 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We also said in Ingman : ‘If a defendant raises the defense of insanity and offers evidence in its support, the presumption that every man is sane disappears. The prosecution then has the burden of proving the fact of sanity beyond a reasonable doubt.’ * * * But ‘[t]he nature and quantum of evidence of sanity which the Government must produce to sustain its burden and take the case to the jury will vary in different cases.’”
    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.