United States v. Vravis’s Empirical Analysis
761 F.2d 513 · 1985
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on United States v. McGlynn · United States v. Everroad · United States v. Wentz · United States v. Clark
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here, Vravis and his vehicle were present in the immediate vicinity of the location of the drug transaction at all times before, during, and after the sale. Before the sale, Vravis was seen standing next to the [dealer’s] vehicle looking at the front tire. During the sale, Vravis’ vehicle was observed in a position from which its occupants could easily view the transaction. Immediately after the sale, [the dealer] was seen driving over to Vravis’ vehicle. The agents watched [the dealer] enter the Vravis vehicle, return to his own car, and begin to leave. In addition, at the time of the arrest the agents were aware of the statements made by [the dealer] that very morning referring to his source who was present in town and was helping him fix his tire as ‘the guys’ and the ‘city boys.’ [The officer] was also told by [the dealer] at the time of the transaction that his source was ‘over there.’ The agents were able to connect ‘the guys’ to Vravis and his companion when they observed Vravis’ conduct and his vehicle with Illinois license plates near the scene of the transaction. From these circumstances, we cannot say the district court erred in finding the agents had probable cause to arrest Vravis____ Here, we find the agents could have reasonably concluded Vravis was [the dealer’s] drug source and was present to keep an eye on his investment and to ensure he received his portion of the proceeds from the transaction.”
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.