United States v. Sanchez DeFundora’s Empirical Analysis
893 F.2d 1173 · 1990
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably United States v. Harris (1990), United States v. Hall (2007)
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 17 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 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Pemberton · Delaware v. New York · Carstea v. Poplar Tree Homeowners Ass'n · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As long as there is sufficient lay testimony or circumstantial evidence from which a jury could find that a substance was identified beyond a reasonable doubt, the lack of scientific evidence does not warrant reversal.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘evidence of the physical appearance of the substance involved in the transaction, ... testimony that a high price was paid in cash for the substance, evidence that transactions involving the substance were carried on with secrecy or deviousness, and evidence that the substance was called by the name of the illegal narcotic by the defendant or others in [his] presence....’””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The government need not introduce scientific evidence to prove the identity of a substance.”
5 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.