In re Nance, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000). · Go Syfert
In re Nance, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
49 citation events (37 in the last 25 years) across 25 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Feliz (mass, 2019-03-26)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Commonwealth v. Feliz
Mass. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen ., 429 Mass. 336 , 350, 709 N.E.2d 1085 (1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 663 (2000) (upholding mandatory, minimally invasive deoxyribonucleic acid [DNA] searches for identification purposes as constitutional for convicted persons with low expectations of privacy in their identity).
cited Cited "see" Commonwealth v. Lunden
Mass. App. Ct. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen., 429 Mass. 336, 339 (1999), cert, denied, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000). 6 It should be noted that when G.
cited Cited "see" Amato v. District Attorney for Cape & Islands District
Mass. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen., 429 Mass. 336 , 354 n.20 (1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000) (upholding State convicted offender database created by G.
discussed Cited "see" Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board
Mass. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen., 429 Mass. 336, 347 (1999), cert, denied, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000) (upholding statutory scheme and stating that DNA database intended to “presence] a permanent identification record of convicted persons for resolving past and future crimes”).
cited Cited "see" Student No. 9 v. Board of Education
Mass. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen., 429 Mass. 336, 343 (1999), cert, denied, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Blixt v. Blixt
Mass. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Landry v. Attorney Gen., 429 Mass. 336, 343 (1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
W.D.N.Y. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See New York v. Seneca Nation of Indians, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see" Rhode Island Department Of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see" Singleton v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In Re Singleton)
Bankr. D.R.I. · 2001 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, In re Collins, 173 F.3d 924 , 929 (4th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 663 (2000); Public Citizen v. Liggett Group, Inc., 858 F.2d 775, 782 (1st Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 488 U.S. 1030 , 109 S.Ct. 838 , 102 L.Ed.2d 970 (1989)(“In support of this ‘injunction,’ the district court necessarily had the power to enforce the order, at any point while the order was in effect, including periods after judgment.”); In re Glannon, 245 B.R. 882, 887 (D.Kan.2000); Speleos v. McCarthy, 201 B.R. 325, 329 (D.D.C.1996); In re Leach, 194 B.R. 812, 815 (E.D.Mic…
discussed Cited "see" Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians v. New York
N.D.N.Y. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam), aff'g 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998), ce rt. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); see, e.g., Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614 , 103 S.Ct. 1382 , 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983) (holding that tribes’ intervention in action brought by United States against states does not violate Eleventh Amendment because “[t]he Tribes do not seek to bring new claims or issues against the states”).
cited Cited "see" Postema v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd.
Wash. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 1073 , 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Dubuc v. Green Oak Township
E.D. Mich. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 1073 , 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" Marchese v. Umstead
E.D. Pa. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 1073, 1074 , 145 L.Ed.2d 1060 (U.S.2000); City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 439 , 105 *371 S.Ct. 3249, 87 L.Ed.2d 313 (1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State Of Connecticut Department Of Environmental Protection v. Occupational Safety And Health Administration
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 912-14 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that state sovereign immunity did not bar an Indian tribe's action against Minnesota because the United States had intervened and sought the same relief as the tribe) (discussed in Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 564 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000)). 31 Connecticut's sovereign immunity does not bar OSHA from intervening as a party in a case originally brought by a private citizen…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection v. Occupational Safety & Health Administration
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 912-14 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that state sovereign immunity did not bar an Indian tribe’s action against Minnesota because the United States had intervened and sought the same relief as the tribe) (discussed in Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 564 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000)).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." In re D.L.C.
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 411.143(c)(3) (requiring personal identification information to be removed prior to establishing a population statistics database, etc.); see also Landry v. Attorney General, 429 Mass. 336 , 709 N.E.2d 1085 , 1095-96 (Mass.1999) (holding that where DNA Act provides safeguards against wrongful use of DNA information and limits purposes for which DNA records may be distributed, plaintiffs’ speculation that data may be used wrongfully is contrary to language of Act), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 663 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." In Re DLC
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 411.143 (c)(3) (requiring personal identification information to be removed prior to establishing a population statistics database, etc.); see also Landry v. Attorney General, 429 Mass. 336 , 709 N.E.2d 1085 , 1095-96 (Mass.1999) (holding that where DNA Act provides safeguards against wrongful use of DNA information and limits purposes for which DNA records may be distributed, plaintiffs' speculation that data may be used wrongfully is contrary to language of Act), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 663 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." in the Matter of R.W.W.
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 411.143(c)(3) (requiring personal identification information to be removed prior to establishing a population statistics database, etc.); see also Landry v. Attorney General , 709 N.E.2d 1085 , 1095-96 (Mass. 1999) (holding that where DNA Act provides safeguards against wrongful use of DNA information and limits purposes for which DNA records may be distributed, plaintiffs’ speculation that data may be used wrongfully is contrary to language of Act), cert. denied , 528 U.S. 1073 (2000).
In re Nance In re Mayes In re Campbell In re Spencer In re Warren In re Ramirez Vela In re YoungBear and In re Williams
No. 99-7086; No. 99-7222; No. 99-7303; No. 99-7332; No. 99-7362; No. 99-7366; No. 99-7404; No. 99-7430.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 10, 2000.
528 U.S. 1073
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

Petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.