United States v. Nicholson’s Empirical Analysis
677 F.2d 706 · 1982
Citation profile
47 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably United States v. Tarantino (1988), United States v. Sanchez-Robles (1991)
47 federal appellate ·
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. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on United States v. Jewell · United States v. Anderson · United States v. Bailey · United States v. Cisneros · United States v. O'Looney
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there was a 'high probability' that the undisclosed venture was illegal. Any reasonable person would have inquired extensively into the nature of the proposed venture ... unless, of course, he did not want to hear the answer.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. at 551 . 20 However, in the instant case, there is no believable hypothesis as to how Juvera-Lopez's fingerprint got on the plastic bag containing the marijuana, other than his participation in the conspiracy. Moreover, additional circumstantial evidence, the business card and pager number, support the finding of an agreement. This court will not substitute its judgment for the jury's.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a reasonable jury could have easily chosen to disbelieve [these] self-serving”
2 later decisions 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.