United States v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
610 F.2d 930 · 1979
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 8 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably United States v. Three Hundred Sixty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Dollars ($364,960.00) in United States Currency (1981), United States v. Martinson (1987)
34 federal appellate · 8 district · 25 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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) · 28 U.S.C. § 292
Relies on United States v. Jeffers · Trupiano v. United States · Addington v. Texas · Don Morrow v. District of Columbia, in the Matter of Harry T. Alexander, Judge, District of Columbia Court of General Sessions · United States v. Wilson
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he seizure of property from someone is prima facie evidence of that person's entitlement, particularly when the seized property is money--negotiable instruments difficult to identify and trace.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The government may meet this burden by demonstrating 'a cognizable claim of ownership or right to possession adverse to that of [the defendant].'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whenever property or money shall be taken from persons arrested, and shall be alleged to have been feloniously obtained, or to be the proceeds of crime, and whenever so brought with such claimant and the person arrested before any court for trial, and the court shall be satisfied from evidence that the person arrested is innocent of the offense alleged, and that the property rightfully belongs to him, said court may, in writing, order such property or money to be returned, and the Property Clerk, if he have it, to deliver such property or money to the accused person himself, and not to any attorney, agent, or clerk of such accused person.”
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.