United States v. Ross’s Empirical Analysis
502 F.3d 521 · 2007
Citation profile
21 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably In re Scrap Metal Antitrust Litigation (2008), United States v. Kuehne (2008)
21 federal appellate ·
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1344
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Griffin v. United States · United States v. Layne · United States v. Prince · United States v. Monus
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Next, I want to explain something about proving a defendant’s knowledge. No one can avoid responsibility for a crime by deliberately ignoring the obvious. If you are convinced that the defendant deliberately ignored a high probability that marijuana was kept at his residence by his brother, Arthur “Ott” Freeman, then you may find that he knew that the marijuana was at his residence. But to find this, you must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was aware of a high probability that his brother kept marijuana at his residence, and that the defendant deliberately closed his eyes to what was obvious. Carelessness, or negligence, or foolishness on his part is not the same as knowledge, and is not enough to convict. This, of course, is all for you to decide.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in crafting jury instructions and does not abuse its discretion unless the jury charge fails accurately to reflect the law.”
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.