United States v. Currier’s Empirical Analysis
621 F.2d 7 · 1980
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably United States v. Endicott (1986), United States v. Smith (1991)
30 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · Bullock v. United States · United States v. Freed · United States v. Powell · United States v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp.
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'even though the firearm is part of the dealer's personal firearms collection * * *.' " Id. at 9. Citing Scherer for support, the district court gave this instruction based on its reading of the statute. The First Circuit, in affirming, stated: 30 We see no merit whatsoever to appellant's argument on this point. The case relied upon by the district court is directly on point and held that it is immaterial whether firearms sold by a dealer were originally part of his personal or business inventory, since the moment they were offered for sale, the federal law applied. This holding is without doubt correct; otherwise, the federal regulations could be circumvented altogether by dealers who were slick enough to establish "personal collections”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the government did not have to prove that [the] appellant 'knowingly' violated the law, it only needed to prove . . . that he 'knowingly' failed to complete the forms”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[s]ection 922(a)(6) does not require a showing that appellant ‘knowingly* violated the law; it simply requires proof that appellant knowingly made a false statement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.