green
Positive treatment
5.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 22 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Mata
(2×)
See 126 Ariz. 19, 26-27 , 612 P.2d 475, 482-83 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wood v. Eli Lilly & Co.
See Sindell v. Abbott Lab., 26 Cal.3d 588 , 163 Cal.Rptr. 132 , 607 P.2d 924, 937 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980); Martin v. Abbott Lab., 102 Wash.2d 581 , 689 P.2d 368, 380 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wood v. Eli Lilly & Co.
See Sindell v. Abbott Lab., 26 Cal.3d 588 , 163 Cal.Rptr. 132 , 607 P.2d 924, 937 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980); Martin v. Abbott Lab., 102 Wash.2d 581 , 689 P.2d 368, 380 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Williams v. State
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alvarado v. State
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205, 1213 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980); Stanley v. State, 93 Fla. 372 , 112 So. 73, 74 (1927); Nelson v. State, 32 Fla. 244 , 13 So. 361 , 362 (1893).
cited
Cited "see"
BIXLER BY BIXLER v. Avondale Mills
See Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, 26 Cal.3d 588 , 607 P.2d 924 , 163 Cal.Rptr. 132 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.E.2d 140 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Connell
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 (Fla. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980); Salvatore v. State, 366 So.2d 745 (Fla. 1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 885 , 100 S.Ct. 177 , 62 L.Ed.2d 115 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Southern Pacific Communications Co. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co.
See Mid-Texas Communications Systems v. AT & T, 615 F.2d 1372, 1389 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
Rice v. State
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
White v. State
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205, 1212-13 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
Bottoson v. State
See Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Southern Motor Carriers Rate Conference, Inc.
See Mid-Texas Communications Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, 615 F.2d 1372 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980); International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. General Telephone and Electronics Corp., 518 F.2d 913, 935-36 (9th Cir. 1975) (“[T]he fact of regulation is significant, but not because it embodies a doctrinal scheme different from the antitrust law; the sole legal perspective is that afforded by the antitrust law.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Southern Motor Carriers Rate Conference, Inc.
See Mid-Texas Communications Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company, 615 F.2d 1372 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980); International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. General Telephone and Electronics Corp., 518 F.2d 913, 935-36 (9th Cir. 1975) ("(T)he fact of regulation is significant, but not because it embodies a doctrinal scheme different from the antitrust law; the sole legal perspective is that afforded by the antitrust law."). 29 As for the second reason-the presence of a state interest in the challenged conduct-the state actio…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Vickers
After reviewing the record and making an independent determination of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and weighing them against each other, we do not find the mitigating circumstances “sufficiently substantial to call for leniency.” Former A.R.S-. § 13-703(E); see State v. Steelman, 126 Ariz. 19 , 612 P.2d 475 , cert. denied 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Williams
(2×)
"Convictions entered prior to a sentencing hearing may thus be considered regardless of the order in which the underlying crimes occurred or the order in which the convictions were entered." Gretzler, 135 Ariz. at 57 n. 2, 659 P.2d at 16 n. 2 (citations omitted); see also State v. Steelman, 126 Ariz. 19, 25 , 612 P.2d 475, 481 (holding that murders committed after the charged murder can support a section 13-703(F)(2) finding), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Barron v. Martin-Marietta Corp.
See, e.g., Sindell v. Abbott Lab., 26 Cal.3d 588 , 163 Cal.Rptr. 132 , 607 P.2d 924 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Consolidated Gas Company of Florida, Inc. v. City Gas Company of Florida, a Florida Corporation
(2×)
See, e.g., Mid-Texas Communications Sys. v. AT&T, 615 F.2d 1372, 1388-89 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286, 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980); Poster Exchange, 431 F.2d at 339 ; Gamco, Inc. v. Providence Fruit & Produce Bldg., Inc., 194 F.2d 484, 488 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 817 , 73 S.Ct. 11 , 97 L.Ed. 636 (1952). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Garshman v. Universal Resources Holding, Inc.
See also Mid-Texas Comm. Sys., Inc. v. AT & T, 615 F.2d 1372, 1387 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 [ 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 ] (1980) (regulated monopoly liable under Section 2 if exclusionary conduct towards competitors shown).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Garshman v. Universal Resources Holding, Inc.
See also Mid-Texas Comm. Sys., Inc. v. AT & T, 615 F.2d 1372, 1387 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980) (regulated monopoly liable under Section 2 only if exclusionary conduct towards competitors shown).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. American Airlines, Inc. And Robert L. Crandall
See also Domed Stadium Hotel, Inc. v. Holiday Inns, Inc., 732 F.2d 480, 487 (5th Cir.1984), Mid-Texas Communications Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 615 F.2d 1372, 1385-86 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 286 , 66 L.Ed.2d 140 (1980), Almeda Mall, Inc. v. Houston Lighting & Power Co., 615 F.2d 343, 351 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 870 , 101 S.Ct. 208 , 66 L.Ed.2d 90 (1980). 8 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Riley v. State
See e.g., Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 , 1211— 12 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980); Findlay v. State, 316 So.2d 33 (Fla.1975); Mathes v. State, 375 So.2d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Combs v. State
See also Antone v. State, 382 So.2d 1205 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 913 , 101 S.Ct. 287 , 66 L.Ed.2d 141 (1980), in which this Court remanded for testimony on an application for new trial based upon a relationship, between the state and a key trial witness, that was unknown to either side until the appeal was pending. [1] 450 U.S. at 29 , 101 S.Ct. at 964. [2] At 665. [3] I must confess that it is beyond my powers of comprehension to understand how the majority can seriously contend that the addition of subsection (i) as an aggravating circumstance "inure[s] to the benefit of a defendant."
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vinson
v.
Richmond Police Department
v.
Richmond Police Department
No. 80-5208.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 14, 1980.
Consideration, Took.
Published
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Justice Powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.