Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 693 F.2d 1306 - United States v. Borders

United States v. Borders’s Empirical Analysis

693 F.2d 1318 · 1982

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
April 2018
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently April 2018

21 federal appellate · 1 district ·

1601982199020002010decided

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. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 1963 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Wong Sun v. United States · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Allen v. United States · Lutwak 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) from the defendant's behavior to flight; (2) from flight to consciousness of guilt; (3) from consciousness of guilt to consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged; and (4) from consciousness of guilt concerning the crime charged to actual guilt of the crime charged.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The law permits the jury to find the accused guilty of any lesser offense which is necessarily included in the crime charged in the indictment-information, whenever such a course is consistent with the facts found by the jury from the evidence in the case, and with the law as given in the instructions of the Court. So, if the jury should unanimously find the accused "Not Guilty" of the crime charged in the indictment then the jury must proceed to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused as to any lesser offense which is necessarily included in the crime charged. The crime enumerated in Count 1 of the indictment in this case necessarily includes the lesser offense enumerated in Count 3 of the indictment. The crime enumerated in Count 3 of the indictment necessarily includes the lesser offense enumerated in Count 2 of the indictment. The jury will bear in mind that the burden is always upon the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every essential element of any lesser offense which is necessarily included in any crime charged in the indictment; the law never imposes upon a defendant in a criminal case the burden or duty of calling any witnesses or producing any evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The conduct of a person at the time of his arrest is not, of course, sufficient in itself to establish the guilt of that person, but is a fact which, if proved, may be considered by the jury in light of all the other evidence in the case in determining the guilt or innocence of that person. You should consider that there may be reasons for the conduct by the Defendant that are fully consistent with innocence. A feeling of guilt does not necessarily reflect actual guilt of a crime. If you determine that the conduct of the Defendant showed a consciousness of guilt on the Defendant’s part, the weight, if any, to be attached to that evidence is also a matter exclusively for you as a jury to determine.”
    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.