United States v. Cano’s Empirical Analysis
702 F.2d 370 · 1983
Citation profile
18 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently July 2010
18 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. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 952
Relies on Henderson v. Kibbe · Mills v. Alabama · United States v. Indiviglio · Thompson v. United States · United States v. Aulet
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.
“Under the law, to act "knowingly" is to do an act voluntarily and intentionally and not because of mistake or accident or some other innocent reason. An act is done “willfully" if it is done voluntarily and intentionally and with the intent to do something the law forbids. You may also find that Robert Sieignano acted knowingly if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that he deliberately ignored or closed his eyes to what otherwise would have been obvious to him. Guilty knowledge may be inferred from the secretive manner in which a transaction is carried out. Thus, you may find that the defendant knew that the purpose of the conspiracy was to possess with the intent to distribute, or actually distribute, a controlled substance, if you find that: 1. the defendant was aware of a high probability that the agreement or understanding entered into among the conspirators, if carried out successfully, would have resulted in the possession with the intent to distribute or the distribution of a controlled substance, and 2. that the defendant acted with deliberate disregard of how such agreement or understanding operated, with a conscious purpose to avoid learning the truth about the subject. ■”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[S]uch knowledge is established if a person is aware of a high probability of its existence, unless he actually believes that it does not exist.”
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.