United States v. Navarez’s Empirical Analysis
954 F.2d 1375 · 1992
Citation profile
51 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Boatmen's National Bank of St. Louis v. Carver · National Farmers Union Insurance v. Crow Tribe of Indians · Guzman v. United States · United States v. Durrive
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]o prove a conspiracy, the government must show that ' there was an agreement between two or more persons to commit an unlawful act, that the defendant was a party to the agreement, and that an overt act was committed in furtherance of the agreement by one of the co-conspirators.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'When the sufficiency of the evidence to connect a particular defendant to a conspiracy is challenged on appeal, substantial evidence should be the test rather than slight evidence or slight connection.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To prove constructive possession in narcotics cases, the government must show that the defendant had the ability to exercise control over the narcotics, that is, the power to possess them.”
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.