United States v. Curry’s Empirical Analysis
902 F.2d 912 · 1990
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 960
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · Mistretta v. United States · United States v. Powell · Bifulco 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The rule of lenity ... is applicable only where there exists some ambiguity in both the statutory language and legislative history concerning the breadth of activity prohibited by a criminal statute. See United States v. Rodgers, 466 U.S. 475 , 104 S.Ct. 1942 , 1948, 80 L.Ed.2d 492 (1984) (statute not sufficiently ambiguous to permit rule of lenity to control); Bifulco v. United States, 447 U.S. 381 , 100 S.Ct. 2247 , 2252, 65 L.Ed.2d 205 (1980) (“Where Congress has manifested its intention, we may not manufacture ambiguity in order to defeat that intent”). When the statute’s provisions clearly delineate the manner in which congressional objectives are to be realized, then the need to interpret a statute in the narrowest possible manner dissipates. McElroy v. United States, 455 U.S. 642 , 102 S.Ct. 1332 , 1341, 71 L.Ed.2d 522 (1982) (“although ‘criminal statutes are to be construed strictly ... this does not mean that every criminal statute must be given the narrowest possible meaning in complete disregard of the purpose of the legislature.’ ”) (quoting United States v. Bramblett, 348 U.S. 503 , 509-10, 75 S.Ct. 504 , 508, 99 L.Ed. 594 (1955) (footnotes omitted)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A reasonable inference for the jury to draw from this evidence is that [the co-conspirators] believed that using a vehicle would assist them in avoiding detection and arrest”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“use ... a person under eighteen years of age to assist in avoiding ... apprehension for”
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.