green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.6 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Dale E. Birdsell
the judge has broad discretion in the conduct of the voir dire, subject to the essential demands of fairness that require that prejudice would be discovered if present
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Munoz
(2×)
Munoz relies on United States v. Apodaca, 666 F.2d 89 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 53 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982), where “the case had been initiated and prepared by the FBI,” the challenged juror, who had heard of the case in the newspapers, had worked for the FBI and her husband had done so for thirty years, she knew “how much investigation went into a case before presentment to a grand jury,” and thus “might-... give a little more credence to the prosecution.” Id. at 93.
discussed
Cited "see"
Hale v. Mingo County Board of Education
See, Brennen [sic] v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC, 501 F.Supp. 912 (D.C.Pa.), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grds., 666 F.2d 845 , cert denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 52 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Lewis v. Sac & Fox Tribe of Oklahoma Housing Authority
The Court went on to note that "Congress has defined Indian country broadly to include formal and informal reservations, dependent Indian communities, and Indian allotments, whether restricted or held in trust by the United States." Id.; see 18 U.S.C. § 1151 . [10] United States v. South Dakota, 665 F.2d 837 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 52 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982); United States v. Martine, 442 F.2d 1022 (10th Cir.1971). [11] The Authority states that such protection is available.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Coggeshall v. State
See, e.g., United States v. Apodaca, 666 F.2d 89, 97 (5th Cir.), cert, denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 53 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982); United States v. Martinez, 616 F.2d 185, 187 (5th Cir.1980), cert, denied, 450 U.S. 994 , 101 S.Ct. 1694 , 68 L.Ed.2d 193 (1981); United States v. Steinkoenig, 487 F.2d 225, 229 (5th Cir.1973); Vaccaro v. United States, 461 F.2d 626, 634-36 (5th Cir.1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island v. Narragansett Electric Co.
United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians v. Oklahoma Tax Comm’n, 510 U.S. 994 , 114 S.Ct. 555 , 126 L.Ed.2d 456 (1993); Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie, 856 F.2d 1384 , 1390 (9th Cir.1988); Indian Country, U.S.A., 829 F.2d at 973 ; see also United States v. South Dakota, 665 F.2d 837 , 838 n. 3 (8th Cir.1981) (applying § 1151 in determining whether a housing project was a dependent Indian community), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 52 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Douglas
In support of his claims, Defendant presented evidence that the African-American population in the Fort Worth division is approximately 10.4103 percent. 4 That figure, which represents the percentage of African-Americans in the gross population of the division, is irrelevant for Sixth Amendment purposes, however, as the pertinent community for a fair cross section analysis is the pool of African-Americans in the division “who are eligible to serve as jurors.” United States v. Brummitt, 665 F.2d 521, 529 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 977 , 102 S.Ct. 2244 , 72 L.Ed.2d 852 (1982); se…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Love v. United States
See, eg., State of Idaho v. United States Dept. of the Army, 666 F.2d 444 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 53 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1983); Ayala v. United States, 550 F.2d 1196 (9th Cir.1977); contra, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Otero, 598 F.2d 627 (1st Cir.1979); Leather's Best v. Mormaclynx, 451 F.2d 800 (2nd Cir.1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Raymond J. Donovan v. Csea Local Union 1000
See also Marshall v. United Steelworkers, 666 F.2d 845 (3d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 52 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982) The determination as to the extent to which the intervenor has provided a "common benefit" is best made by the district court. 5 See note 3, supra 6 The Hall court stated: Confronted with a virtually identical situation in Mills, we explained that the inclusion in certain sections of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 of express provisions for recovery of attorneys' fees "should not be read as denying to the courts the power to award counsel fees in suits …
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Donovan v. CSEA Local Union 1000, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees
See also Marshall v. United Steelworkers, 666 F.2d 845 (3d Cir.1981), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 823 , 103 S.Ct. 52 , 74 L.Ed.2d 58 (1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hall
v.
Board of Trustees of Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System
v.
Board of Trustees of Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System
No. 81-1880.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 1982.
Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1)
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.