Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 F.2d 32 - Johnson v. United States

Johnson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

62 F.2d 32 · 1932

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

50193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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. § 550

Relies on Coates 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The evidence shows that the parties were associated together for the illegal purpose of manufacturing intoxicating liquor, and any act done by one or more of the parties to accomplish that purpose was the act of all. And this is true regardless of the fact that counts 2, 3, and 4 do ' not directly charge a conspiracy. 18 U.S.C.A. § 550 . That section is as follows: ‘§ 550. (Criminal Code, section 332.) “Principals” defined. Whoever directly commits any act constituting an offense defined in any law of the United States, or . aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures its commission, is a principal.’ “The evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict of guilty on such last ■ mentioned counts. The fact that these appellants were not personally present at the place where and the time when the liquor was manufactured is immaterial. It is not necessary that one who aids and abets the commission of a crime shall be present when the crime is committed to sustain a conviction under this section. The jury necessarily found against appellants’ contention that they had abandoned the unlawful enterprise. Having voluntarily entered into the undertaking and aided and assisted its execution, they are responsible for the consequences.” (Emphasis supplied.) '”
    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.