United States v. Burns’s Empirical Analysis
597 F.2d 939 · 1979
Citation profile
60 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably United States v. Martinez (1985), United States v. Gerald (1980)
60 federal appellate · 1 district · 8 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
Relies on Burks v. United States · United States v. Scott · United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co. · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Bollenbach v. United States
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The District Court must determine whether the relevant evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, could be accepted by a reasonably-minded jury as adequate and sufficient to support the conclusion of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The same test applies whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial. All reasonable inferences which tend to support the Government’s case must be accepted. Any conflicts in the evidence must be resolved in the Government’s favor.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[p]ossession of the fruits of crime, recently after its commission, justifies the inference that the possession is guilty possession, and, though only prima facie evidence of guilt, may be of controlling weight unless explained by the circumstances or accounted for in some way consistent with innocence.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[O]nce the government's evidence has passed the test of legal sufficiency, a trial judge is without authority to enter a judgment of acquittal `simply because he thinks that course would be most consistent with the interests of justice.'”
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.