green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958
1992
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Charles Lee Streets v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Florida Division of Corrections
The Court was quoting from Judge Tut-tle of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 571, 572 , N. 2 (en banc), rev’d on confession of error on other grounds 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 1958. 3 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mora-Gomez
See Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 755 , 90 S.Ct. 1463, 1472 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970) (emphasis added) (quoting Shelton v. United States, 246 F.2d 571 , 572 n. 2 (5th Cir.1957), rev'd on other grounds, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958)). 8 .
cited
Cited "see"
Alexander v. United States
See Daugette v. Patterson, 250 F.2d 753, 756 (5th Cir.1957), cert. denied, 356 U.S. 902 , 78 S.Ct. 561 , 2 L.Ed.2d 580 (1958).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fambo v. Smith
See Brady *595 v. United States, supra, 397 U.S. at 755, 90 S.Ct. 1463 , citing with approval Judge Tuttle’s decision in Shelton v. United States, 246 F.2d 571 , 572 n. 2 (5th Cir. 1957), rev’d, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Smith v. Johnson
See Shelton v. United States, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958), rev’g 246 F.2d 571 (5th Cir. 1957); Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101 , 62 S.Ct. 964 , 86 L.Ed. 1302 (1942); Walker v. Johnston, 312 U.S. 275 , 61 S.Ct. 574 , 85 L.Ed. 830 (1941).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Alex Popeko
See Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir. 1957, 242 F.2d 101 , set aside en banc, 1957, 246 F.2d 571 , reversed per curiam, 1958, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. L. C. Green
See Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir. 1957, 242 F.2d 101 , vacated on rehearing en banc, 246 F.2d 571 , reversed, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States of America Ex Rel. Roy C. Brown v. Hon. J. Edwin Lavallee, Warden of Clinton Prison, Dannemora, New York
See Shelton v. United States, 246 F.2d 571 (5th Cir.), rev’d on confession of error by the Solicitor General, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958); ABA Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty §§ 3.1(a), 6.4-6.5 (1968).
discussed
Cited "see"
Vincent E. Scott v. United States
(2×)
See Shelton v. United States, 242 F. 2d 101 (5th Cir.), rev’d on rehearing, 246 F.2d 571 (1957) (en banc), rev’d 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958) (per curiam), discussed infra. .
cited
Cited "see"
Rigby v. Russell
See Shelton v. United States (C.A. 5, 1957) 242 F.2d 101 , reh. 246 F.2d 571 , reversed 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Elksnis v. Gilligan
See Shelton v. United States, 246 F.2d 571, 577, 580 (5th Cir. 1957) (dissenting opinion), rev’d on confession of error by Solicitor General, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958). 32 .
cited
Cited "see"
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Thompson I. Welch, Individually, Thomspon I. Welch, Individually v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
See Daugette v. Patterson, 5 Cir., 1957, 250 E.2d 753, cert, den., 1958, 356 U.S. 902 , 78 S.Ct. 561 , 2 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Bobby Gene Johnson v. United States
See subsequent en danc decision, reversing on the merits, 246 F.2d 571 , vacated and remanded, 356 U.S. 26 , 79 S. Ot. 563, 2 L.Ed.2d 579 . 21 .
cited
Cited "see"
Charles F. Waugaman v. United States
See, Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 242 F.2d 101 , reversed en banc, 5 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 571 , reversed, 1958, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Skok v. State
See, e.g., Shelton v. United States, 242 F.2d 101, 112-113 (5th Cir.1957), set aside by court sitting en banc, 246 F.2d 571 (5th Cir.1957), en banc decision reversed and original judgment remanding to trial court upheld, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958); State v. Ledezma, supra; Thacker v. State, 254 Ind. 665, 669-670 , 262 N.E.2d 189, 191-192 (1970); Campbell v. State, supra, 229 Ind. 198 , 96 N.E.2d 876 ; United States v. Tyler, 413 F.Supp. 1403, 1405-1406 (M.D.Fla.1976). *82 The issues concerning Skok’s pleas have not previously been litigated, and Skok is clearly facing …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Norman Cooper, Doing Business as C & H Contracting Company
The applicable Supreme Court precedent clearly holds the government accountable with regard to any promises made to induce a defendant to plead guilty: “[W]hen a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise or agreement of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be part of the inducement or consideration, such promise must be fulfilled. ” Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 269 , 92 S.Ct. 495, 502 , 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971) (emphasis added); see also Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 755 , 90 S.Ct. 1463, 1472 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970) (“‘“[A] plea of guilty entered into by on…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dodd v. Williams
See also Shelton v. United States, 246 F.2d 571 , 572 n. 2 (5th Cir.1957) (en banc), rev’d. on confession of error on other grounds, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 (1958): [A] plea of guilty entered by one fully aware of the direct consequences, including the actual value of any commitments made to him by the court, prosecutor, or his own counsel, must stand unless induced by threats (or promises to discontinue improper harassment), misrepresentation (including unfulfilled or unfulfillable promises), or perhaps by promises that are by their nature improper as having no proper rel…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
George A. Watts v. United States
Compare Shelton v. United States, 5 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 571 , reversed 1958, 356 U.S. 26 , 78 S.Ct. 563 , 2 L.Ed.2d 579 . 5 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Manuel Rodriguez Trading Corp.
v.
United States and United States v. Manuel Rodriguez Trading Corp.
v.
United States and United States v. Manuel Rodriguez Trading Corp.
No. 664; No. 767.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 10, 1958.
Paul D. Page, Jr. for petitioners in No. 664 and respondents in No. 767., Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub, Samuel D. Slade and Robert S. Green for the United States.
Published
Court of Claims. Certiorari denied.
Reported below: 139 Ct. Cl. 564,153 F. Supp. 442.