Bramble v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

43 federal appellate · 4 district · 11 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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In holding that the forfeiture proceeding was invalid the Court [in U.S. Coin and Currency ] was essentially stating only that the civil penalty could not be imposed in a manner inconsistent with the fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. We therefore do not read U.S. Coin and Currency as signaling an end to the characterization of forfeiture actions as essentially civil proceedings.... What Coffey, Boyd, One Plymouth Sedan, and U.S. Coin and Currency do indicate is that the civil nature of forfeiture proceedings will not be permitted to provide an avenue through which the fundamental rights of protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and self-incrimination can be frustrated. A close reading of those cases simply does not justify the inference that they were intended to transform forfeiture proceedings into criminal actions for all procedural purposes. The absence of the reasonable doubt standard in the challenged forfeiture process does not result in a denial of due process.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 520 So. 2d 336 - State v. Spooner · United States v. D.K.G. Appaloosas, Inc.

2. “Any person claiming such vessel, vehicle, aircraft, merchandise, or baggage may at any time within twenty days from the date of the first publication of the notice of seizure file with the appropriate customs officer a claim stating his interest therein. Upon the filing of such claim, and the giving of a bond to the United States in the penal sum of $5,000 or 10 percent of the value of the claimed property, whichever is lower, but not less than $250, with sureties to be approved by such customs officer, conditioned that in case of condemnation of the articles so claimed the obligor shall pay all the costs and expenses of the proceedings to obtain such condemnation, such customs officer shall transmit such claim and bond, with a duplicate list and description of the articles seized, to the United States attorney for the district in which seizure was made, who shall proceed to a condemnation of the merchandise or other property in the manner prescribed by law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Floyd v. United States

3. “[w]henever any person interested in any .. . vehicle ... seized under the provisions of this chapter, . files with the Secretary of the Treasury under the customs laws or under the navigation laws, before the sale of such ... vehicle, ... a petition for the remission or mitigation of such . .. forfeiture was incurred without willful negligence or without any intention on the part of the petitioner to defraud the revenue or to violate the law, or finds the existence of such mitigating circumstances as to justify the remission or mitigation of such ... forfeiture, may remit or mitigate the same upon such terms and conditions as he deems reasonable and just”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 520 F. Supp. 127 - Devito v. UNITED STATES, DEPT. OF JUSTICE, ETC.