United States v. Dohm’s Empirical Analysis
597 F.2d 535 · 1979
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably United States v. Berkowitz (1981), United States v. Thompson (1983)
33 federal appellate · 1 district · 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 18 U.S.C. § 3041 · 18 U.S.C. § 3109 · 18 U.S.C. § 3146 (Bail Reform Act of 1984) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Chapman v. State of California · Johnson v. Zerbst · Simmons v. United States · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“THE COURT: Agent, what is his participation? AGENT O’CONNOR: Mr. Dohm was the main source of the buy. Mr. Rowen introduced Agent Castillo to him and during undercover negotiations Mr. Dohm stated to the agent that if this went through that he would be able to supply the agent approximately one to two kilos on a steady basis after this. THE WITNESS: But, your Honor, sir, it wasn’t true, but that’s what I told them. THE COURT: Who did he tell that to? AGENT O’CONNOR: Agent Castillo. THE COURT: Are you here? AGENT O’CONNOR: Yes, sir. AGENT CASTILLO: Yes, sir I am. THE COURT: Did he tell you that? AGENT CASTILLO: Yes, sir. I told him if he would be willing to supply on a steady basis that this was, you know, the first time and I was a good customer and I would come to him, you know, several times afterward, and if there would be any problems in supplying me with additional amounts, and he said it would be no problem. THE WITNESS: It’s — (inaudible). THE COURT: Now, remember you don’t have a lawyer with you now and this is just a bond hearing. THE WITNESS: Yes. THE COURT: You might hurt yourself to get involved too much, but if you know what you’re doing, what you’re saying, its — (inaudible). THE WITNESS: I would just say that it took me almost two weeks to get what I got, and I don’t think I could get it again.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“THE COURT: All right. All right, gentlemen, if you wish I can give you a bond hearing at this time or you can wait until you get an attorney. That’s your right. If you feel like you may jeopardize anything or hurt yourself by answering questions under oath, then you certainly have the right to wait for a full bond hearing until you have your attorney with you. If you wish, though — I will only take sworn testimony which subjects you to perjury, and I also advise you that you may not have an attorney and you may say something that might hurt you in future proceedings. In other words, the law says that the testimony here really should be used against you at future proceedings but I don’t know how it can be done. Technically, they won’t use it, but then they’re here listening and there is a Government attorney and Government agents so— I do this because you don’t have an attorney with you and we try to advise you and so on. I’m either telling you to have your bond hearing now or not to. I’m just trying to advise you of the possibilities, then you make an intelligent decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Q. And, before Judge Palermo asked these four defendants any questions, did he advise them of any of their constitutional rights? A. [Agent Castillo] Yes, he did, sir. He advised each individual of his constitutional rights. Q. And, what rights would those be, sir? A. That’s their right to remain silent, right to obtain counsel, a lawyer, if they can’t afford a lawyer would be appointed to them, and— ****** Q. Recalling your attention to Mr. Dohm, do you recall Judge Palermo advising Mr. Dohm of his rights? A. Yes, I do, sir. Q. Do you recall Judge Palermo [telling him] that anything he said at the hearing could be used against him in later proceedings? A. Yes, he did. Q. And after the Judge admonished him as to these rights, did Mr. Dohm make any statements in your presence? A. Yes, he did make a statement. Q. Would you tell the Court and jury what those statements were? A. Mr. Dohm made a statement to the fact that it took him approximately two weeks to obtain the one kilogram [of cocaine] he handed me on that day in August. [Italics ours].”
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.