United States v. Squella-Avendano’s Empirical Analysis
478 F.2d 433 · 1973
Citation profile
71 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently January 1997 · most notably United States v. Bell (1982), United States v. Vera (1983)
71 federal appellate · 2 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 Glasser v. United States · Holland v. United States · Southern Railway Co. v. North Carolina · Simuel v. United States · Viscardi 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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is some support for this type of instruction in the lower court decisions, [citations omitted] but the better rule is, that where the jury is properly instructed on the standards for reasonable doubt, such an additional instruction on circumstantial evidence is confusing and incorrect, [citations omitted]. Circumstantial evidence in this respect is intrinsically no different from testimonial evidence. Admittedly, circumstantial evidence may in some cases point to a wholly incorrect result. Yet this is equally true of testimonial evidence. In both instances, a jury is asked to weigh the chances that the evidence correctly points to guilt against the possibility of inaccuracy or ambiguous inference. In both, the jury must use its experience with people and events in weighing the probabilities. If the jury is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, we can require no more. 348 U.S. at 139-40 , 75 S.Ct. at 137 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“reasonably find that the evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis, except that of guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“we must affirm any conclusion that could be reached by reasonable minds.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.