United States v. Muench’s Empirical Analysis
694 F.2d 28 · 1982
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably United States v. Stratton (1985), United States v. Orozco-Prada (1984)
23 federal appellate · 5 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 21 U.S.C. § 801 (§ 101 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 951 (Controlled Substances Import and Export Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on McMann v. Richardson · Tollett v. Henderson · Kercheval v. United States · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · United States v. Ramsey
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.
“[t]he actual possession on United States territory supplies the jurisdictional nexus and obviates the need for proof of intent to distribute within the United States. The Ninth Circuit has recently held that possession of contraband in the United States with intent to distribute in another country is subject to § 841(a)(1). United States v. Gomez-Tostado, 597 F.2d 170 (9th Cir.l979). Accord, United States v. Madalone, 492 F.Supp. 916 , 920 (S.D.Fla. 1980). This conclusion is clearly consistent with the Congressional intent and policy considerations discussed above.”
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.