green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
12.5 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“a defendant is obliged to show that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched before he can invoke the protection of the Fourth Amendment”
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
"[P]lacing on [the defendant] the burden of proving his conviction's expunction would be analogous to placing upon a person never before convicted the burden of proving his clear record"
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“[i]n our post-Rakas [v. Illinois ] world ... a defendant is obliged to show that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched before he can invoke the protection of the Fourth Amendment”
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“proof that informant’s information was false would not have vitiated probable cause for the warrant”
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 39 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Signer v. State
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
lacing on the burden of proving his conviction's expunction would be analogous to placing upon a person never before convicted the burden of proving his clear record
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Gehena
a defendant is obliged to show that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched before he can invoke the protection of the fourth amendment
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Gerena
n our post-rakas world ... a defendant is obliged to show that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched before he can invoke the protection of the fourth amendment
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Marty O'Shea Franklin v. James Rose
a difference in legal theory between that urged in state courts and in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus precludes exhaustion.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Melvin Lee Phillips, Sr.
proof that informant's information was false would not have vitiated probable cause for the warrant
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Edwards
See State v. Tinsley , 181 Conn. 388 , 399- 400, 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Pinnock , 220 Conn. 765 , 788, 601 A.2d 521 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Davis
See State v. Tinsley , 181 Conn. 388 , 402, 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981), overruled on other grounds by State v. Pinnock , 220 Conn. 765 , 788, 601 A.2d 521 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Regan v. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners
See Wilks v. Israel, 627 F.2d 32, 37 (7th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981); State v. Jeffers, 135 Ariz. 404, 428 , 661 P.2d 1105, 1129 (1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 865 , 104 S.Ct. 199 , 78 L.Ed.2d 174 (holding that recusal was not required where a litigant made the trial judge the target of a scheme involving the receipt of unsolicited goods from several mail order firms, reasoning that this “kind of conduct should not be rewarded”); Matter of Extradition of Singh, 123 F.R.D. 140, 149 (D.N.J.1988) (no recusal based on the receipt of a threat …
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hansen
The state has conceded, however, and we agree, that larceny in the sixth degree is a lesser included offense of robbery in the first degree; see State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 396-97 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kelvin Bennett
See United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136, 143 (D.C.Cir.1980) (jurors reasonably could conclude owner and operator of car possessed firearm found within easy reach of driver's seat), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gerardo I. Ponce, Juan C. Gonzalez-Calas and Hipolito Reyes-Cotto
See United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 487 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Ziemba
See State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 391 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Francisco Paulino
(2×)
See United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 486 (2d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
Herod v. State
See United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136 (D.C.Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Kluttz
See State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 396-97 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
cited
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Hancock v. McEvers
See Wilks v. Israel, 627 F.2d 32, 38 (7th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Manley
Under these circumstances, however, the proof on the element that differentiates first-degree robbery from third-degree robbery, as a matter of law, was not “sufficiently in dispute”; see State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 400 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Stackhouse
See United States v. Arrington, 618 F. 2d 1119, 1124 (5th Cir.1980), cert. den. 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 876 , 66 L.Ed. 2d 812 (1981); United States v. Fryer, 545 F. 2d 11, 13 (6th Cir.1976).
cited
Cited "see"
United States of America Ex Rel. Melvin H. Sullivan v. James A. Fairman, Warden
See Wilks v. Israel, 627 F.2d 32, 38 (7th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Darryl Wayne Flenoid
See United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136 , *869 143 (D.C.Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); United States v. Bethea, 442 F.2d 790, 793 (D.C.Cir.1971).
cited
Cited "see"
Tuten v. United States
See United States v. Arrington, 618 F. 2d 1119, 1124 (CA5 1980), cert. denied, 449 U. S. 1086 (1981); United States v. Sinkfield, 484 F. Supp. 695, 598 (ND Ga. 1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Minick
(2×)
See United States v. Whitfield, 203 U.S.App.D.C. 102, 108 , 629 F.2d 136, 142 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); Campbell, supra at 27 .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Corchado
Natale v. White, 158 Conn. 618, 619 , 262 A.2d 184 (1969); Gaul v. Noiva, 155 Conn. 218, 220 , 230 A.2d 591 (1967); see State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 404-405 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Gallagher
State v. Vennard, 159 Conn. 385, 399 , 270 A.2d 837 (1970); see State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 394 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Gallagher
State v. Vennard, 159 Conn. 385 , 399 , 270 A.2d 837 (1970); see State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388 , 394 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. White
See United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 490 (2d Cir. 1980) (Meskill, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Minick
(2×)
See United States v. Whitfield, 203 U.S.App.D.C. 102, 108 , 629 F.2d 136, 142 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); Campbell, supra at 27 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jiles, Anthony, Eliecer
Accord, United States v. Arrington, 618 F.2d 1119, 1125 (5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 876 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); United States v. Alonzo, 571 F.2d 1384, 1387 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 847 , 99 S.Ct. 147 , 58 L.Ed.2d 149 (1978); McLawhorn v. North Carolina, 484 F.2d 1, 5 (4th Cir. 1973); Palmer v. Zahradnick, 423 F.Supp. 130, 131 (E.D.Va. 1976). .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Packard
(2×)
See State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 393 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Jacobowitz
See State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388, 396-97 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S. Ct. 874 , 66 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Covington
Section 29-35(a) provides in relevant part: "No person shall carry any pistol or revolver upon his or her person, except when such person is within the dwelling house or place of business of such person, without a permit to carry the same issued as provided in section 29-28 ...." "[T]o obtain a conviction for carrying a pistol without a permit, the state was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant (1) carried a pistol, (2) for which he lacked a permit, (3) while outside his dwelling house or place of business." State v. Douglas , 126 Conn. App. 192 , 209, 11 A.3d 699 , c…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Porras-Fuerte
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 486 (2d Cir.1980) (threshold question in motion to suppress is whether the defendant had legitimate expectation of privacy in area searched or articles seized), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); United States v. Erwin, 875 F.2d 268, 270 (10th Cir.1989) (the defendant has burden to show challenged search and seizure infringed his personal Fourth Amendment interests); State v. McCarthy, 258 Mont. 51 , 852 P.2d 111, 113 (1993) (the defendant bears the burden of proving that he had a legitimate expectation of priva…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jimmy John Gutierrez
Moreover, we agree with the reasoning of a line of Eighth Circuit cases holding that “testimony that the defendant may have placed something in the spot where the police later found the weapon can support a finding of possession.” United States v. Flenoid, 718 F.2d 867 ,. 868 (8th Cir.1983); see also United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136, 143 (D.C.Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hugh B. Halliman
See, e.g., United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136 , 140 n. 6 (D.C.Cir.1980) (declining' to decide whether collective knowledge standard applied because officer who conducted search knew enough personally to support probable cause), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981). 6 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ford v. State
Compare Wilks v. Israel, 478 F.Supp. 404, 408-09 (E.D.Wis.1979), aff'd, 627 F.2d 32 (7th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981) (defendant who had been hospitalized in a mental institution five times for observation and treatment found competent to waive counsel in view of medical testimony that his behavior was "goal-directed and manipulative").
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Ingram
See, e.g., State v. Tinsley, 181 Conn. 388 , 435 A.2d 1002 (1980), cert. den., 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 874 , 66 L.Ed.2d 811 (1981) (permit an element of offense); State v. Robarge, 450 So.2d 855 (Fla.1984) (permit an element of offense, thus burden of persuasion on prosecution); Commonwealth v. Jones, 372 Mass. 403 , 361 N.E. 2d 1308 (1977) (permit not an element of offense since other general law requires holder of required permit to demonstrate lawful authority for conduct); People v. Henderson, 391 Mich. 612 , 218 N.W. 2d 2 (1974) (permit not an element of the offense); Commonwealth v. Bi…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Tyrone McEachin
See, e.g., United States v. Whitfield, 629 F.2d 136, 141-42 (D.C.Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981) (where probable cause and exigent circumstances existed, delay before search did not eliminate exigent circumstances even if de-. lay was long enough to obtain a warrant); United States v. Johnson, 561 F.2d 832, 842, 844 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 907 , 97 S.Ct. 2953 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1080 (1977) (half-hour delay before conducting warrantless search did not terminate probable cause or exigent circumstances).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jerome Evans
See also United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 489 (2d Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); United States v. Garris, 616 F.2d 626, 633-34 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 3021 , 65 L.Ed.2d 1119 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Charles Jenkins
See also United States v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483, 489 (2d Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1086 , 101 S.Ct. 875 , 66 L.Ed.2d 812 (1981); United States v. Garris, 616 F.2d 626, 633-34 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 926 , 100 S.Ct. 3021 , 65 L.Ed.2d 1119 (1980).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tinsley
v.
Connecticut
v.
Connecticut
No. 80-5388.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 12, 1981.
Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.