United States v. White’s Empirical Analysis
560 F.2d 787 · 1977
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently December 2007
6 federal appellate · 6 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
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 802 (§ 102 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 811 (§ 201 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 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) · 21 U.S.C. § 877 (§ 507 of the Controlled Substances Act)
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(d) Stimulants. Unless specifically excepted or listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of the following substances having a stimulant effect on the central nervous system: (1) Amphetamine, its salts, optical isomers, and salts of its optical isomers.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Although certain of the substances pist-ed in the schedules] have quantitative concentration levels prescribed and others refer to such concepts as chemical equivalents, every substance listed appears generically, and in none is anything other than chemical identity (or quantity or equivalence) required to establish a substance as controlled. The entire statutory scheme makes it clear that the effects of any substance are considered fully in making the control and scheduling decisions on that substance.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Sheffield v. State
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.