green
Positive treatment
18.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Bridget M. Denny-Shaffer
(2×)
This court held that where the mental capacity of the accused was put in issue, the proper charge to the jury, in part, was that mental capacity was an essential element of the crime charged; that before convicting the accused, the jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt not only that the accused committed the unlawful act, but that he was criminally responsible for his conduct; that a person is not criminally responsible for his conduct if, at the time of the conduct, "as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacked substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Haga
United States v. Shuckahosee, 609 F.2d 1351 , 1355 n. 4 (10th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 919 , 100 S.Ct. 1283 , 63 L.Ed.2d 605 (1980) (referring to the Model Penal Code’s definition adopted in Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gary Rawson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
(2×)
See United States v. Villano, 816 F.2d 1448, 1450 (10th Cir.1987) (en banc) (en banc rehearing granted “to consider the propriety of changing [our] established rule”); Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 425 (10th Cir. 1963) (en banc) (en banc court convened “to reexamine our prevailing rule”), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. William Harry Hack, Jr., Lucas Clinton Owens
Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.1963) (en banc), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Robert Lyons
(2×)
Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 425 (10th Cir.1963).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Dysart
Under our decisions, a person is not criminally responsible for his conduct if, at the time of the offense, “as a result of mental disease or defect, he lacked substantial capacity either to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.” Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Michael Anthony Madrid
(2×)
Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Lewis Shuckahosee
Since the psychiatrist and the psychologist who testified on Shuckahosee’s behalf asserted that the required elements of insanity were present, see United States v. Munz, 504 F.2d 1203, 1208 (10th Cir. 1974); Wibn v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964), 4 appellant argues that the district court was obligated, at a minimum, to submit the issue to the jury.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Graham v. State
(2×)
We also invite attention to suggested charges in United States v. Brawner, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 1 , 471 F.2d 969 , at page 1008 (1972), and in Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, at 430 (10th Cir. 1963).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Bert Glenn Munz
(2×)
However, as noted, the court was following the general practice on verdict forms in criminal trials and had carefully submitted the competency issue in accordance with Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Willis Edward Walker
The test for determining criminal responsibility in this circuit was enunciated in Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. den’d, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 .
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Donald F. Bettenhausen and Bernice A. Bettenhausen
Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 . 4 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Archie W. Brawner
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
To the same general effect is the position in the research memorandum from the University of Virginia Law School Research Group to Mr. Flynn, appellant's appointed counsel attached to his brief 19 See e. g., Burger, then Circuit Judge, Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the National Conference of State Trial Judges, Chicago, Illinois, Aug. 9-11, 1963, quoted in Wion v. United States, 325 F. 2d at 428, n. 10 ; Bazelon, Chief Judge, in Washington v. United States, 129 U.S. App.D.C. at 42, n. 33, 390 F.2d at 457 (1967); Haynesworth, Chief Judge, in en banc opinion in United States v. Chan…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. George M. Stewart
Wion v. United States, supra, 325 F.2d at 430.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Don Wade v. United States
(2×)
See also Pope v. United States, 372 F.2d 710, 736 (8th Cir. 1967); Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Harty
United States v. Rabinowitz, supra, (1950); Harris v. United States, 331 U.S. 145, 151 , 67 S.Ct. 1098 , 91 L.Ed. 1399, 1406 (1947); Agnello v. United States, 269 U.S. 20 , 46 S.Ct. 4 , 70 L.Ed. 145 , 51 A.L.R. 409 (1925); Theriault v. United States, 401 F.2d 79, 83 (8th Cir. 1968); United States v. Baratta, 397 F.2d 215, 223 (2d Cir. 1968) (cert. denied, 393 U.S. 939 , 89 S.Ct. 293 , 21 L.Ed.2d 276 ); United States v. Smith, 393 F.2d 687, 689 (6th Cir. 1968); Lemons v. United States, 390 F.2d 346, 349 (9th Cir. 1968); Jenkins v. United States, 361 F.2d 615, 619 (10th Cir. 1966); United States…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. John Edward Smith, Jr.
United States v. Chandler, 393 F.2d 920, 927 (4th Cir., 1968); United States v. Shapiro, 383 F.2d 680, 686 (7th Cir. 1967); United States v. Freeman, 357 F.2d 606, 622 (2d Cir. 1966); Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 427 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Floyd Edward Richardson
Cf. Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 423 (10th Cir. 1963).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Commonwealth v. McHoul
(4×)
also: Cited "see"
All such cases show that psychiatry is far from an exact science and that whether a defendant is to be called sane or insane cannot depend on any certain measurement. *552 Chief Judge Murrah, in Wion v. United States, 325 F. 2d 420, 427-428 (10th Cir.), quoting Frankfurter, J., in Leland v. Oregon, 343 U. S. 790, 803 , has observed, “Only one proposition seems certain, i.e. that ‘. . . [s]anity and insanity are concepts of incertitude. ’ ” In any but the extreme case, where there will be no controversy, no expert can speak with scientific certainty and no jury can or does act on the as…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Duane Earl Pope v. United States
(4×)
Because, however, criminal responsibility in the federal courts "is a rule of decision", Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 425 (10 Cir. 1963), cert. denied 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 ; United States v. Freeman, 357 F.2d 606, 614 (2 Cir. 1966), it is not inappropriate that, sitting en banc, we examine it once again. 129 We last fully considered the issue in Feguer v. United States, 302 F.2d 214, 242-245 (8 Cir. 1962), cert. denied 371 U.S. 872 , 83 S.Ct. 123 , 9 L.Ed.2d 110 , a capital case.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Charles Freeman
Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 425 (1963), cert. denied 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1309 (1964). 17 It also seems significant that in the face of a proliferation of cases in the area of criminal responsibility, the Supreme Court has consistently refrained from granting certiorari to consider this issue, despite inconsistent results among state courts and federal circuits. 18 At least one writer has suggested that the Supreme Court's inaction in this area is not mere coincidence, but is motivated by a desire to encourage the Circuits to discuss and develop alternative tests …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James Austin
See Pope v. United States, 372 F.2d 710, 736 (8th Cir.[1967]), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 392 U.S. 651 , 88 S.Ct. 2145 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1317 [ (1968) ], see also Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir. [1963]), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 [(1964)].
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Terry Francis Gallagher
See Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Frederick
See Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 425 (10th Cir. 1963) (an banc), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Odell Bennett
See Pope v. United States, 372 F.2d 710, 736 (8th Cir.), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 392 U.S. 651 , 88 S.Ct. 2145 , 20 L.Ed.2d 1317 , see also Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 430 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. William Herbert Greene, III
(2×)
See Judge Murrah's thoughtful opinion in Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 428-430 (10th Cir. en banc 1963) 6 A determination of mental incompetency after arrest and before trial in accordance with the provisions of 4244, 4246 and 4248 may result in commitment running 'until the sanity or mental competency of the person shall be restored . . ..' See 18 U.S.C. 4247 and 4248 7 See 18 U.S.C. 4245 and 4247 8 Speaking for the Court in Lynch v. Overholser, 369 U.S. 705 , 82 S.Ct. 1063 , 8 L.Ed.2d 211 , Mr. Justice Harlan made the following comment on the 'prior to the imposition of sentence' lang…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James Kenneth Julian
(2×)
See Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Rosalind Edith Chandler, United States of America v. Frederick Freeman Leister, Jr.
See Wion v. United States, 10 Cir., 325 F.2d 420, 428-430 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Goldberg
(2×)
United States v. DeCatur, 430 F.2d 365 (9th Cir. 1970); see also, Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420 (10th Cir. 1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Bell
See, e. g., Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420, 423 (10th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 (1964); Ward v. United States, 316 F. 2d 113, 118 (9th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 852 , 84 S.Ct. 132 , 11 L.Ed.2d 89 (1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Juanita Williams
(2×)
See also United States v. Currens, 290 F.2d 751 (3rd Cir. 1961) and Wion v. United States, 325 F.2d 420 (10th Cir. 1963), certiorari denied, 377 U.S. 946 , 84 S.Ct. 1354 , 12 L.Ed.2d 309 . 3 The reasons that Illinois rejected the M'Naghten test in favor of the formulation in the Model Penal Code are shown in the Comments of the Joint Committee to Revise the Illinois Criminal Code (38 Smith-Hurd Ill.Ann.Stats. § 6-2, at pp. 214-219)
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PETERBILT-SOUTHERN SALES, INC., Appellant,
v.
PACIFIC CAR AND FOUNDRY COMPANY, Appellee
v.
PACIFIC CAR AND FOUNDRY COMPANY, Appellee
20447.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 3, 1963.
Bill C. Hunter, Gerald R. Coplin, Passman & Jones, Dallas, Tex., for appellant., Jerry L. Buchmeyer, William H. Neary, Dallas, Tex., Thompson, Knight, Wright & Simmons, Dallas, Tex., of counsel, for appellee.
Brown, Wisdom, Bell.
Published
PER CURIAM.
There was ample basis in the evidence for the conclusion of the District Court that the account which forms the basis of the judgment was kept separate and apart from the other accounts for which suit was filed; and that the transaction out of which it arose was in interstate commerce and therefore not subject to the Texas Antitrust Statutes, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Stat. Art. 7426 et seq., and to the defense based thereon. See Albertype Co. v. Gust Feist Co., 1909, 102 Tex. 219, 114 S.W. 791; Hughes Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Cicero Trust & Savings Bank, 5 Cir., 1928, 24 F.2d 199, and 15 C.J.S. Commerce § 133b, as distinguished from 'cases involving the successful assertion of such defenses where the transactions were intrastate in character, Fuqua v. Pabst Brewing Co., 1896, 90 Tex. 298, 38 S.W. 29, 35 L.R.A. 241, and the line of cases fallowing it such as Segal v. McCall Co., 1916, 108 Tex. 55, 184 S.W. 188, and Kissel Motor Co. v. Walker, 5 Cir., 1921, 270 F. 492.
The necessary findings and conclusions having ample support in fact and law, and no prejudicial error being otherwise disclosed, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.