Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 521 F.3d 101 - United States v. Page

United States v. Page’s Empirical Analysis

521 F.3d 101 · 2008

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
January 2024
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2024

8 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

100200820102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)

Relies on McGee v. Marcum · United States v. David · United Retired Pilots Benefit Protection Ass'n v. United Air Lines, Inc. · Draughn v. Louisiana · United States v. Soto-Beníquez

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Since [the defendant] subsequently helped to - 19 - load these bags into the . . . vehicle for transport, the jury reasonably could infer both that [the defendant] had formed the requisite intent to possess that cocaine . . . and further that [the defendant] had implicitly joined in and aided the . . . conspiracy.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “point[] to specific record evidence (e.g., a plea agreement), and suggest[] to the jury how these particular facts may have provided the witness with an incentive to testify truthfully.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Experience-derived police testimony concerning criminals' typical modi operandi during a drug transaction does not automatically constitute expert testimony.”
    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.