green
Positive treatment
Trending · 57 recent citers
14.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 2013 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2013
2019
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Fackrell
(3×)
"For serious physical abuse to be aggravating in a murder case, a defendant must inflict suffering or mutilation above and beyond that necessary to cause death " and "must intend such gratuitous violence." United States v. Agofsky , 458 F.3d 369 , 374 (5th Cir. 2006) (emphasis added), cert. denied , 549 U.S. 1182 , 127 S.Ct. 1149 , 166 L.Ed.2d 998 (2007) ; see United States v. Ebron , 683 F.3d 105 , 151 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied , 571 U.S. 989 , 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013) ; see also United States v. Snarr , 704 F.3d 368 , 393-94 (5th Cir. 2013) (finding that "a rational juror c…
discussed
Cited "see"
Stephen Dearth v. Loretta E. Lynch
(2×)
See Schrader v. Holder, 704 F.3d 980, 988-89 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013); Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller II), 670 F.3d 1244, 1252-53 (D.C.Cir.2011).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mauricio Luna-Soto
(2×)
See United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 , 562 n. 28 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mario Vega-Renova
(2×)
Because Vega preserved his argument in the district court, our review is de novo. 1 Vega has identified no prior Illinois case applying the statute in an “administering” or “dispensing” situation. 2 A theoretical possibility that a statute might encompass types of conduct that would not qualify as a drug trafficking offense is insufficient. 3 Thus, the district court was correct in determining that Vega’s conviction was a drug trafficking offense for purposes of the § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(i) enhancement. 4 In addition, even if Vega could establish error, any such error would be harmless b…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Juan Giron-Guerrero
(2×)
See United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 548 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Emanuel Ferman
(2×)
See United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 549 (5th Cir.) (en banc) (defining method to determine enumerated offenses), cer t. denied, — U.S. —, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alberto Elizondo-Hernandez
(2×)
See United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 548 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alfredo Chacon
(2×)
See United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 552 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gustavo Castaneda
See id. at 552 n.16. 5 Case: 12-41353 Document: 00512477400 Page: 6 Date Filed: 12/19/2013 No. 12-41353 conviction under § 30.02(a)(3) is not a generic burglary because it lacks the requisite element of specific intent to commit a crime at the time of entry.22 Whether Castaneda was convicted under § 30.02(a)(1) or § 30.02(a)(3) therefore matters because the former is a crime of violence under the enumerated offense of “burglary of a dwelling” but the latter is not.
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Graham
(3×)
See id., 603 ; see also, e.g., United States v. Ebron, 683 F.3d 105 , 134 n.9 (5th Cir. 2012) (determining that, although court in Williamson pro- nounced broad rule, ‘‘its analysis is predicated on the assumption that the challenged statement was a [postar- rest] confession’’), cert. denied, 571 U.S. 989 , 134 S. Ct. 512 , 187 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Elmer Godoy-Castaneda
(2×)
For the enumerated offenses, “we conduct a ‘common-sense’ categorical approach, looking to various sources — such as ‘the Model Penal Code, the LaFave' and Scott treatises, modern state codes, and dictionary definitions’ — to define each crime by its ‘generic, contemporary meaning.’ ” Id. (quoting United States v. Moreno-Florean, 542 F.3d 445, 449 (5th Cir.2008)); see also United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 , 552 n. 17 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 512 , 187 L.Ed.2d 365 (2013).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Gonzalez
(2×)
See id., 740 (concluding that it was inappropriate for juror to bring belt and shirt into jury room to conduct experiment); see also United States v. Ebron, 683 F.3d 105 , 127–28 (5th Cir. 2012) (District Court did not abuse its discretion in excusing juror on basis of her lack of candor and failure to abide by court’s instructions), cert. denied, U.S. , 134 S. Ct. 512 , 187 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Joseph EBRON
v.
UNITED STATES.
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 12–6956..
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 4, 2013.
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.