green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.2 score
“the erroneous excusing of a veniremember will call for reversal only if the record shows that the error deprived the defendant of a lawfully constituted jury”
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Smith v. State
the erroneous excusing of a veniremember will call for reversal only if the record shows that the error deprived the defendant of a lawfully constituted jury
discussed
Cited "see"
Manor Care Inc. v. Tom Douglas
See Ingram v. Earthman, 993 S.W.2d 611, 641 (Tenn.Ct.App.1998) (“Reversal is required ... when the special verdict form is confusing or inconsistent with the trial court’s instructions.”), cer t. denied, 528 U.S. 986 , 120 S.Ct. 445 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); Janice v. Duluth & Northeastern R.R.
discussed
Cited "see"
Manor Care Inc. v. Tom Douglas
See Ingram v. Earthman, 993 S.W.2d 611, 641 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1998) (“Reversal is required . . . when the special verdict form is confusing or inconsistent with the trial court’s instructions.”), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 986 , 120 S.Ct. 445 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); Janke v. Duluth & Northeastern R.R.
discussed
Cited "see"
King v. Rivas
See Amati v. Woodstock, 176 F.3d 952, 957-59 (7th Cir.) (Posner, J.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 985 , 120 S.Ct. 445 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); Lang v. Gates, 36 F.3d 73 , 75 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1017 , 115 S.Ct. 579 , 130 L.Ed.2d 494 (1994). 4 .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Reid
(2×)
See Ingram v. Earthman, 993 S.W.2d 611, 639 (Tenn.App.1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 986 , 120 S.Ct. 445 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); State v. Blanton, 926 S.W.2d 953, 959-60 (Tenn.Crim.App.1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ford v. State
See Jones v. State, 982 S.W.2d 386, 399 (Tex.Crim.App.1998)(Baird, J., dissenting)(the Court of Criminal Appeals may not interpret the harmless error rule in a way that exceeds the Court's rule making authority), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 985 , 120 S.Ct. 444 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Tracy v. State
See Ladd v. State, 3 S.W.3d 547, 562 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (citing Jones v. State, 982 S.W.2d 386, 394 (Tex.Crim.App.1998), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 444 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999)), petition for cert. filed, No. 99-7472 (Dec. 17, 1999).
cited
Cited "see"
Frederick White v. James Schotten, Warden
See Carpenter v. Mohr, 163 F.3d 938, 942-43 (6th Cir.1998), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 120 S.Ct. 444 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alley v. Bell
See Carpenter v. Mohr, 163 F.3d 938, 944-45 (6th Cir.1998)(holding that if a federal habeas petitioner seeks to show cause for a procedural default by'claiming ineffective assistance of counsel on direct - appeal in state court, he must first exhaust the ineffective assistance claim by presenting it to the state’s highest court), pet. for cert. filed, - U.S. -, 120 *624 S.Ct. 444, 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); Jones v. Toombs, 125 F.3d 945, 947 (6th Cir.1997)(holding that petitioner “failed to satisfy the cause requirement of Coleman " because he did not raise his ineffective assistance claim �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Gould
See Northern Pacific Railroad Co. v. Herbert, 116 U.S. 642 , 646, 6 S.Ct. 590 , 29 L.Ed. 755 (1886) ; Hooks v. Workman, 689 F.3d 1148 , 1176 (10th Cir.2012) ; United States v. Lindsey, 634 F.3d 541 , 553-54 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 563 U.S. 1000 , 131 S.Ct. 2475 , 179 L.Ed.2d 1232 (2011) ; United States v. Perez, 387 F.3d 201 , 207-208 (2d Cir.2004) ; United States v. Brooks, 175 F.3d 605 , 606 (8th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1119 , 120 S.Ct. 941 , 145 L.Ed.2d 818 (2000) ; United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas, 11 F.3d 1218 , 1222 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1129 , 114 S.Ct. 2138 ,…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Feldman v. State
Art. 35.16(a)(9); see also Jones v. State, 982 S.W.2d 386, 389 (Tex.Crim.App.1998), cert. denied 528 U.S. 985 , 120 S.Ct. 444 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ripkowski v. State
On the other hand, if it is discovered that a particular attorney procured the omission of an issue without a valid trial strategy, then that conduct can be made the basis of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. [49] 26 S.W.3d 895, 896-899 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). [50] 962 S.W.2d 544, 560-563 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 978 , 119 S.Ct. 437 , 142 L.Ed.2d 357 (1998). [51] The rule provides: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Standefer v. State
(2×)
Johnson v. State, 43 S.W.3d 1, 6 (Tex.Crim.App.2001); see also Jones v. State, 982 S.W.2d 386, 393 (Tex.Crim.App.1998), cer t. denied, 528 U.S. 985 , 120 S.Ct. 444 , 145 L.Ed.2d 362 (1999); Martinez v. State, 763 S.W.2d 413 , 415 n. 2 (Tex.Crim.App.1988).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lai
v.
International Immunology Corp.
v.
International Immunology Corp.
No. 98-9539.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 8, 1999.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Texas (1)
Ct. App. Gal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.