United States v. Doe’s Empirical Analysis
921 F.2d 340 · 1990
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742 · 46 U.S.C. § 70505
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Burks v. United States · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Nye & Nissen 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e have specifically stated that “in the context of review of a motion for acquittal, ‘no legal distinction exists between circumstantial and direct evidence.’ ” Furthermore, it is unquestioned that direct evidence need not be presented. Judicial authority teaches us that “the government can use circumstantial evidence as long as the evidence, viewed as a whole, is sufficient to warrant a reasonable jury to conclude that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a]ge is not ordinarily relevant in determining whether a sentence should be outside the guidelines.”
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.