green
Positive treatment
7.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Frumento
(2×)
It has recently been articulated as “the Department of Justice policy of not prosecuting individuals previously tried in a state court for offenses involving the same acts, unless there exist ‘most compelling reasons,’ *141 and then only after the specific approval of the appropriate Assistant Attorney General has been obtained.” Watts v. United States, supra, 422 U.S. at 1033 , 95 S.Ct. at 2649 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 689 (dissenting opinion, quoting Solicitor General’s brief for the United States).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Carrye E. Maxwell
See United States v. Rose, 500 F.2d 12 (2d Cir.1974), vacated on other grounds, 422 U.S. 1031 , 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975); United States v. Wilkes, 732 F.2d 1154 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 964 , 105 S.Ct. 364 , 83 L.Ed.2d 299 (1984); United States v. Guthrie, 387 F.2d 569 (4th Cir.1967); United States v. Cord, 654 F.2d 490 (7th Cir.1981); United States v. Robbins, 613 F.2d 688 (8th Cir.1979); United States v. Mitman, 459 F.2d 451 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 863 , 93 *1038 S.Ct. 154, 34 L.Ed.2d 111 (1972).
examined
Cited "see"
Franklin v. State
(4×)
See U. S. v. Impson, 506 F.2d 1055 (5th Cir.) (per curiam), vacated and remanded, 422 U.S. 1031 , 95 S.Ct. 2647 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975), on remand 531 F.2d 274 (5th Cir. 1976); and U. S. v. Sharp, 513 F.2d 786 (5th Cir. 1975), vacated and remanded 423 U.S. 919 , 96 S.Ct. 258 , 46 L.Ed.2d 246 on remand, 536 F.2d 601 (5th Cir. 1976) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see"
Markoe v. Legislature of Virgin Islands
See Clark v. Peters, 422 U.S. 1031 , 95 S.Ct. 2647 , 45 L.Ed.2d 687 Vacating mem., 508 F.2d 267 (5th Cir. 1975); Dallas County v. Reese, 421 U.S. 477 , 95 S.Ct. 1706 , 44 L.Ed.2d 312 (1975) (per curiam); Dusch v. Davis, 387 U.S. 112 , 87 S.Ct. 1554 , 18 L.Ed.2d 656 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bruce Thompson
(2×)
See Watts v. United States, 422 U.S. 1032 , 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 ; Ackerson v. United States, 419 U.S. 1099 , 95 S.Ct. 769 , 42 L.Ed.2d 796 , and Hayles v. United States, 419 U.S. 892 , 95 S.Ct. 168 , 42 L.Ed.2d 136 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John Arthur Henderson
(2×)
See 422 U.S. 1031 , 95 S.Ct. 2647 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Don Garriga Chapman v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. Impson, 506 F.2d 1055 (5th Cir.) (per curiam), vacated and remanded, 422 U.S. 1031 , 95 S.Ct. 2647 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975), on remand, 531 F.2d 274 (5th Cir. 1976), rehearing denied, 535 F.2d 286 (5th Cir. 1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Juan Villar
For example, in Rinaldi v. United States , the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Federal Rule 48 (a) motion to dismiss should have been approved, even though the motion was not made "until after the trial had been completed." 434 U.S. 22 , 26, 98 S.Ct. 81 , 54 L.Ed.2d 207 (1977) (per curiam); see also Watts v. United States , 422 U.S. 1032 , 1033, 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975) (approving dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule 48(a) motion made after defendant's conviction and after Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed conviction).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Stanford Hadley
Abbate v. United States, 359 U.S. 187 , 79 S.Ct. 666 , 3 L.Ed.2d 729 (1959); see also Watts v. United States, 422 U.S. 1032 , 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Burt Steven Mikka
See, e. g., Watts v. United States, 422 U.S. 1032, 1032 , 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975), vacating United States v. Watts, 505 F.2d 951 (5th Cir. 1974) (state charges including carrying concealed weapon; federal charge of possession of unregistered firearm); Hayles v. United States, 419 U.S. 892, 892 , 95 S.Ct. 168 , 42 L.Ed.2d 136 (1974), vacating United States v. Hayles, 492 F.2d 125 (5th Cir. 1974) (state charge of robbery; federal charge of bank robbery).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Issac Washington and Peter Rinaldi
(2×)
See, e. g., Watts v. United States, 422 U.S. 1032 , 95 S.Ct. 2648 , 45 L.Ed.2d 688 (1975); Ackerson v. United States, 419 U.S. 1099 , 95 S.Ct. 769 , 42 L.Ed.2d 796 (1975); Hayles v. United States, 419 U.S. 892 , 95 S.Ct. 168 , 42 L.Ed.2d 136 (1974).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Impson
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 74-1162.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 23, 1975.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of United States v. Hale, ante, p. 171. Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Reported below: 506 F. 2d 1055.