Blumenthal v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
88 F.2d 522 · 1937
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1998 · most notably United States v. Five Gambling Devices (1953), United States v. Cohen (1944)
27 federal appellate · 1 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 27 U.S.C. § 1 · 27 U.S.C. § 121 (Wilson Act) · 27 U.S.C. § 122 (Webb-Kenyon Act) · 27 U.S.C. § 123
Relies on Berger v. United States · Reynolds v. States · Armour Packing Company v. United States · Leisy v. Hardin · Agnew 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is elementary that every one is presumed to know the law of the land, whether that be the common law or the statutory law, and hence, one’s ignorance of the law furnis"hes no defense for criminal acts, and this rule applies whether the crime charged is malum prohibitum or malum in se. * * * “Assuming, without deciding, that the presumption was a rebuttable one, it is to be observed that the defendants introduced no evidence in an attempt to rebut the presumption. The corpus delicti having been established, and the government having thus proved a prima facie case, the burden of adducing evidence to rebut the presumption shifted to the defendants. The matter was peculiarly within their knowledge. Agnew v. United States, 165 U.S. 36 , 17 S.Ct. 235 , 41 L.Ed. 624 .” 19”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The existence of a conspiracy must generally be established by circumstantial evidence, and in support of the charge of conspiracy, the overt acts and the circumstances under which they are committed may be considered in connection with other evidence. Safarik v. United States, 8 Cir., 62 F.2d 892 ; Goode v. United States, 8 Cir., 58 F.2d 105 ; Feigenbutz v. United States, 8 Cir., 65 F.2d 122 ; Galatas v. United States, 8 Cir., 80 F.2d 15 . “While there must be an agreement among the defendants charged, it need be in no particular form; it need not be expressed, but may be an implied understanding, and it is usually to be inferred from the circumstances shown in each case.””
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.