green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
9.0 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1996 ·
…handcuffing substantially aggravates the intrusiveness of an otherwise routine investigatory detention and is not part of a typical terry stop
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 27 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Womack v. United States
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
handcuffing substantially aggravates the intrusiveness of an otherwise routine investigatory detention and is not part of a typical terry stop
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Gernavage v. Shalala
factual issues need not have been resolved by the secretary in accordance with what we conceive to be the preponderance of the evidence.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
John Wesley Duffel v. Michael Dutton, Warden, Tennessee State Penitentiary
double jeopardy does not bar retrial when evidence is improperly excluded, ... not the result of the state's negligently failing to muster its proof.
cited
Cited "see"
Eastman v. Barnhart
See Rutherford v. Schweiker, 685 F.2d 60, 62 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1212 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); see generally Hon.
cited
Cited "see"
Molina v. Apfel
See Rutherford v. Schweiker, 685 F.2d 60, 62 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1212 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); see generally Hon.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Gentry
See United States v. Weems, 49 F.3d 528, 530-31 (9th Cir.1995) (retrial not barred by double jeopardy where prosecutor failed to prove element of crime that, at time of trial, did not need to be proved) (citing Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 373-74 (10th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lewis Theodore Wacker, United States of America v. Leroy Allen Cooley, United States of America v. John Lee Wacker, United States of America v. Edith Faye Wacker, United States of America v. Susan Mary Boyle, United States of America v. Michael L. Lipp, United States of America v. Perl Glen Van Pelt
See United States v. Weems, 49 F.3d 528, 530-31 (9th Cir.1995) (retrial not barred by double jeopardy where prosecutor failed to prove element of crime that, at time of trial, did not need to be proved) (citing Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 373-74 (10th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983)). 43 We find the present situation analogous to that in Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S. 33 , 109 S.Ct. 285 , 102 L.Ed.2d 265 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wacker
See United States v. Weems, 49 F.3d 528, 530-31 (9th Cir.1995) (retrial not barred by double jeopardy where prosecutor failed to prove element of crime that, at time of trial, did not need to be proved) (citing Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 373-74 (10th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sapienza v. Shalala
DISCUSSION The findings of the Secretary of Health and Human Services as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive. 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g); see Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 , 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427 , 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971); see Rutherford v. Schweiker, 685 F.2d 60, 62 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1212 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); see also Rivera v. Harris, 623 F.2d 212, 216 (2d Cir.1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Clarke Dexter Weems
(2×)
See Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 373-74 (10th Cir.1982) (rehearing on habitual offender status not barred merely because government’s original proof did not conform to the requirements of a change in law occurring after trial), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Hanks
See United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289-90 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211, 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); United States v. Harley, 682 F.2d 398, 402 (2d Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Christopher X. Bohlen v. Paul D. Caspari William Webster
See Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 374 (10th Cir.1982) (double jeopardy does not bar resentencing when evidence is incorrectly excluded), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); Denton v. Duckworth, 873 F.2d 144, 148 (7th Cir.) (under Lockhart v. Nelson, double jeopardy does not apply where evidence initially introduced was sufficient, even if some of, it was introduced erroneously), cert. denied, 493 U.S 941, 110 S.Ct. 341 , 107 L.Ed.2d 330 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Edward X. Mondello
(2×)
The Court stressed that “our cases impose no rigid time limitation on Terry stops” and that the inquiry must focus on other factors as well, such as “the need to consider the law enforcement purposes to be served by the stop as well as the time reasonably needed to effectuate those purposes.” Id. at 685 , 105 S.Ct. at 1575 (citations omitted); see generally United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1290-91 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); United States v. Winfrey, 915 F.2d 212, 216 (6th Cir.1990); United States v. Hardy, 855 F.2d 753…
discussed
Cited "see"
Lu Ann Buffkins v. City of Omaha, Douglas County, Nebraska, a Municipal Corporation Alvin Grigsby And, John Friend
See United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289 (9th Cir.1982) (police may detain a person for further investigation when, together with other relevant facts, the person’s race matches the racial description of persons suspected of criminal activity), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983). 8 II.
cited
Cited "see"
Wilson v. State
See generally United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); State v. Ruiz, 526 So.2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Leonard G. Greene
See United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289-90 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Duffel v. Dutton
In footnote 4, Burks says: “There is no claim in this case that the trial court committed error by excluding prosecution evidence which, if received, would have rebutted any claim of evidentiary insufficiency.” In the case before us, the trial judge improperly excluded the crucial evidence, and this case may be distinguished from Burks * * *. 631 S.W.2d 445, 448 (Tenn.Cr.App.1981); accord Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 374 [2] (10th Cir.1982), cert. den. 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re David S.
See, e.g., United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289-90 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983) (finding that, under the circumstances, placing suspect in handcuffs was justified when police believed another suspect was close by and at large).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Phillips v. State
State v. Barber, 118 Wash.2d 335 , 823 P.2d 1068 (1992) (en banc); see also United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289 (9th Cir.1982) ("Race or color alone is not a sufficient basis for making an investigatory stop."), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983) (citing United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 886-87 , 95 S.Ct. 2574 , 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975)); La-Fontaine v. State, 749 So.2d 558 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (holding that there was no reasonable suspicion to justify an investigatory stop where a white female was talking to black males in a predominately b…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Thomas L. Hudspeth
(2×)
This is not a "case of the state getting a second chance to prove something it had failed to prove the first time, the heart of double jeopardy's bar." Tate v. Armontrout, 914 F.2d 1022, 1026-27 (8th Cir.1990) (concluding that an insufficient record was trial error); see also Linam v. Griffin, 685 F.2d 369, 374 (10th Cir.1982) (holding that double jeopardy does not bar retrial when evidence is incorrectly excluded), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983). 68 In reaching the conclusion that the Double Jeopardy Clause is not violated by the reconsideration of the th…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pendergast v. State
See, e.g., Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir.1982) (holding that evidence was sufficient- to withstand a motion for acquittal, where the threatening'language was not ambiguous), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Loren Francis Bellrichard
Watts, 394 U.S. at 708 , 89 S.Ct. at 1402 ; see also Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. John Wesley Manning
See also United States v. Lincoln, 589 F.2d 379, 381 (8th Cir.1979) and Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 *86 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Anthony Ruiz Del Vizo
See, e.g., United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289-90 (9th Cir.1982) (handcuffing justified by possibility that another suspect lurked in the vicinity), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Smith v. State
See also, Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235 (8th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); United States v. Maisonet, 484 F.2d 1356 (4th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 933 , 94 S.Ct. 1447 , 39 L.Ed.2d 491 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Leslie Craig Robertson, and Connie M. Steeprow
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Bautista, 684 F.2d 1286, 1289 (9th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1206 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983); Patterson, 648 F.2d at 632-34 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Outley
The principle is well-established that “a defendant who refuses to sign a written waiver may nonetheless voluntarily waive the exercise of his Miranda rights by orally indicating his willingness to cooperate with the police questioning.” State v. Groves, 646 S.W.2d 82, 85 (Mo. banc 1983); State v. Auger, 434 S.W.2d 1, 5-6 (Mo.1968); State v. Hull, 595 S.W.2d 49, 51-52 (Mo.App.1980); see also, Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235 (8th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211 , 103 S.Ct. 1207 , 75 L.Ed.2d 447 (1983).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kunitake
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 82-5633.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 22, 1983.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.