green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
11.8 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 30 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Gerald Lynn Harrison v. Norman J. Owen
(4×)
also: Cited "see"
it is well established that the admission of statements obtained in violation of miranda may be said to constitute harmless error
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Dahlquist
(2×)
See Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 875 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. O'KELLEY
See State v. Day, 94 N.M. 753, 756-58 , 617 P.2d 142, 145-47 (retrial is barred when prosecutor engages in misconduct designed to require mistrial and thereby prevent an acquittal), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Aragon
See State v. Day, 94 N.M. 753, 758 , 617 P.2d 142, 147 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Allocco
(2×)
Bahadar, 954 F.2d at 825 ; see United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1064 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980) (citation omitted) (“extraordinary circumstances” might require government to confer use immunity on defense witness).
discussed
Cited "see"
Windsor Shirt Co. v. New Jersey National Bank
(2×)
See Fed.R.Evid. 801(a); see United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1065 (2d Cir.1979) (pointing with a finger is a statement if it was an act intended by the deponent to convey information), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Douglas Ray Harrell
(2×)
See Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 875 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James Stanley Bentley
(2×)
See Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 23-24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 827-28 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 23 Harmless error "is an exacting standard that must be uncompromisingly applied." Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 876 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
examined
Cited "see"
Oliver Jones v. Richard L. Dugger
(4×)
See Cape, 741 F.2d at 1295 (citing Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870 (5th Cir.) (admission of statements obtained in violation of Miranda may be harmless error), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980)). 59 Were it to do so, it could not conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the error in this case had no effect on the outcome of Jones's trial.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hall
(2×)
See State v. Day, 91 N.M. 570 , 577 P.2d 878 (Ct.App. 1978), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 *707 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980); State v. Sibold, 83 N.M. 678 , 496 P.2d 738 (Ct.App. 1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sammie Felder, Jr. v. O.L. McCotter Director, Texas Department of Corrections
(2×)
See abo Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 876 (5th Cir.1980) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980). 25 . 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). 26 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Barry D.W. Clark, and Andrew Thomas Cook
(2×)
See United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1061 (2d Cir.1980) (as modified on reh’g), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980); United States v. Coven, 662 F.2d 162, 170 (2d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 916 , 102 S.Ct. 1771 , 72 L.Ed.2d 176 (1982).
examined
Cited "see"
Garnett William Cape v. Robert Francis, Warden
(4×)
See Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 875 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert, denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
New York v. Quarles
(2×)
I find in this reasoning an unwise and unprincipled departure from our Fifth Amendment precedents. *679 Before today's opinion, the procedures established in Miranda v. Arizona had "the virtue of informing police and prosecutors with specificity as to what they may do in conducting custodial interrogation, and of informing courts under what circumstances statements obtained during such interrogation are not admissible." Fare v. Michael C., 442 U. S. 707, 718 (1979); see Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F. 2d 870, 873-874 (CA5 1980) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U. S. 860 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Fred A. Shelton
(2×)
See United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1061 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ioannis Tzakis
(2×)
See United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1061 (2d Cir.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980). 3.
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Sun Myung Moon and Takeru Kamiyama
(4×)
See United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1061-62 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum, Etc.
(2×)
See United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1062-63 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980); United States v. Friedman, 593 F.2d 109, 118 (9th Cir. 1979).
examined
Cited "see"
Eutues White v. Fred Finkbeiner
(4×)
See Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870 , 872 n.3 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980) (extension argument made for first time on appeal); Wilson v. Henderson, 584 F.2d 1185, 1189 (2d Cir. 1978) (dicta), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 945 , 99 S.Ct. 2892 , 61 L.Ed.2d 316 (1979) (“The holding in Stone was expressly grounded upon Fourth Amendment search and seizure issues and the exclusionary rule.”); Smith v. Wainwright, 581 F.2d 1149, 1151 (5th Cir. 1978) (dicta); Cannistraci v. Smith, 470 F.Supp. 586, 590 (S.D.N.Y.1979) (dicta) (Stone rationale onl…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Alberico
See, e.g., State v. Day, 94 N.M. 753, 758 , 617 P.2d 142, 147 (insanity), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980); City of Albuquerque v. Ackerman, 82 N.M. 360, 362 , 482 P.2d 63, 65 (1971) (value of real property); State v. Hughes, 108 N.M. 143, 145 , 767 P.2d 382, 384 (Ct.App.1988) (value of personal property), cert. denied, 108 N.M. 115 , 767 P.2d 354 (1989); Estrada v. Cuaron, 93 N.M. 283, 285 , 599 P.2d 1080, 1082 (Ct.App.) (speed), cert. denied, 93 N.M. 172 , 598 P.2d 215 (1979); SCRA 1986, 11-901(B)(2) (handwriting); SCRA 1986, 11-901(B)(5) (voice). .
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Jackson v. Maley
(4×)
In Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 538 , 105 S.Ct. 1487, 1491 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 [1985], the Court notes that "[p]roperty interests are not created by the Constitution, ‘they are created and their dimensions are defined by existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law_ quoting Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2709 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 [1972]; see also Phillips v. Williams, Okl., 608 P.2d 1131, 1133 [1980], cert.denied subnom., 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 [1980]. .
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
William Alvin Smith, Cross-Appellee v. Walter Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Cross-Appellant
(4×)
Sec. 16-5-1(c) 19 In Christopher, we noted that we have also ruled the unlawful admission of a confession to be harmless when there was direct physical evidence of guilt. 824 F.2d at 846 n. 24; see, e.g., Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 876-78 (5th Cir.) (en banc) (unlawfully admitted confession that condom found on defendant's person contained heroin harmless in light of laboratory tests identifying substance), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
William Alvin Smith, Cross-Appellee v. Walter Zant, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Cross-Appellant
(2×)
In Christopher , we noted that we have also ruled the unlawful admission of a confession to be harmless when there was direct physical evidence of guilt. 824 F.2d at 846 n. 24; see, e.g., Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 876-78 (5th Cir.) (en banc) (unlawfully admitted confession that condom found on defendant’s person contained heroin harmless in light of laboratory tests identifying substance), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Charles
(2×)
See e.g., Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980); State v. Jones, 386 So.2d 1363 (La.1980). [1] The record in this case reflects no indication that defendant's statement was involuntary.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Keith Bryan Webb
(2×)
See, e.g., Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d *393 870, 875-78 (5th Cir.1980) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Remai
(2×)
Compare United States v. Alba, 15 M.J. 573 (A.C.M.R. 1983), with Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 161 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Esteban Leon Gonzales
See also United States v. Mouton, 617 F.2d 1379, 1384 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980) (evidentiary rulings are reviewed under the “abuse of discretion” standard).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Naylor R. Harrison, Jr., United States of America v. Jay C. Wissler
See, e.g., U.S. v. Mouton, 617 F.2d 1379, 1385 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 163 , 66 L.Ed.2d 77 (1980); United States v. Cooper, 577 F.2d 1079, 1086 (6th Cir.), cert. *1053 denied, 439 U.S. 868 , 99 S.Ct. 196 , 58 L.Ed.2d 179 (1978); Del Cristo v. United States, 327 F.2d 208, 209 (5th Cir.1964) (per curiam); Henderson v. United States, 218 F.2d 14 (6th Cir.1955).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Garcia
See also Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 874-75 (5th Cir.), cert. denied 449 U.S. 860 (1980), (apparently citing LaVallee with approval); United States v. Menichino, 497 F.2d 935, 941 (5th Cir. 1974); United States v. McDaniel, 463 F.2d 129, 136 (5th Cir. 1972), cert. denied 413 U.S. 919 (1973); United States v. Regilio, 669 F.2d 1169, 1177 (7th Cir. 1981), cert. denied 457 U.S. 1133 (1982); United States v. Prewitt, 553 F.2d 1082, 1085-86 (7th Cir.), cert. denied 434 U.S. 840 (1977); United States v. Booth, 669 F.2d 1231, 1238 (9th Cir. 1981); United States v. LaMonica, 472 F.2d 580, 581 (…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In the Matter of Grand Jury Empanelled March 19, 1980 United States of America
(2×)
In Fisher , “[t]he existence and location of the papers [was] a foregone conclusion and the taxpayer add[ed] little or nothing to the sum total of the Government’s information by conceding that he in fact ha[d] the papers.” 425 U.S. at 411 , 96 S.Ct. at 1581 ; see also United States v. Praetorius, 622 F.2d 1054, 1062-63 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 860 , 101 S.Ct. 162 , 66 L.Ed.2d 76 (1980) (ordering production of document because its existence and location were known by the Government).
Harryman
v.
Estelle, Corrections Director
v.
Estelle, Corrections Director
No. 79-6750.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 6, 1980.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Seventh Circuit (2)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.