Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 526 F.2d 1349 - United States v. Marshall

United States v. Marshall’s Empirical Analysis

526 F.2d 1349 · 1975

Citation profile

120
cited by 120 later decisions
7
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

89 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 120 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably United States v. Hearst (1977), United States v. Mehrmanesh (1982)

89 federal appellate · 3 district · 9 state decisions

51019751980199020002010decided

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. § 802 (§ 102 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 6532 · 26 U.S.C. § 6851 · 26 U.S.C. § 7421 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Brinegar v. United States · Spinelli v. United States · Jones v. United States · Davis v. Alaska

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

  1. “... a trial court will rarely abuse its discretion by refusing to admit the (polygraph) evidence, even for a limited purpose and under limited conditions.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. Both heroin and cocaine are ‘narcotic drugs’ under 21 U.S.C. § 802 (16); if the jury could find Marshall knew the character and uses for the cocaine, they might reasonably infer that he knew the character and uses of heroin. 526 F.2d, at 1360-1361 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “who provided only information which, combined with other facts, gave the officers probable cause to arrest”
    2 later decisions 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.