green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
18.4 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Leroy Warshawsky (93-1345) Ira Warshawsky (93-1346) and Ted Warshawsky (93-1473)
conscious avoidance of participating in a conspiracy and agreeing to be a member of a conspiracy are mutually exclusive concepts.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Milovanovic
See United States v. Benny, 786 F.2d 1410, 1418 (9th Cir.) (“Proof of an affirmative, material misrepresentation supports a conviction of mail fraud without any additional proof of a fiduciary duty.”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 668 , 93 L.Ed.2d 720 (1986). .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hicks, Unpublished Decision (12-31-2003)
See State v. Post (Sept. 20, 1996), Lucas App. No. L-95-153, citing McCullough v. Suter (C.A. 7, 1985), 757 F.2d 142 , and United States v. Benny (C.A. 9, 1986), 786 F.2d 1410 , certiorari denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 668 . {¶ 34} Third, the evidence presented at trial indicated that the incidents of corrupt activity were not isolated.
discussed
Cited "see"
Badley v. United States
If the district court has not held an evidentiary hearing, however, this court will affirm such a denial only if “the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ; see Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert, denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 667 , 93 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Riggs v. United States
Since this panel has no authority to overrule the an evidentiary hearing, however, this court will affirm only if decision of a prior panel, see Timmer v. Michigan Dep’t of “the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively Commerce, 104 F.3d 833, 839 (6th Cir. 1997), we are show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” 28 U.S.C. compelled to hold that Riggs’s claim is without merit. § 2255; see Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
William R. Riggs v. United States
If the district court has not held an evidentiary hearing, however, this court will affirm only if “the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ; see Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 667 , 93 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Angelo Arthur Darin v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 12 Accordingly, we hereby affirm the district court's judgment.
cited
Cited "see"
Nelson A. Acosta v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 17 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Ronald \Jake\" Jacoway v. United States"
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 7 Accordingly, we hereby affirm the district court's judgment.
cited
Cited "see"
Leroy H. Eriksen v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 19 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Loretta Walton v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 12 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Elvira Rincon v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 9 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
David Scott Doucet v. Robert Lecureux
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 15 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. * The Honorable Paul R.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Harris
The Court, having presided over the Defendant’s plea and sentencing proceedings, is “in a position to recall the facts and circumstances surrounding the plea after consulting the record and [is] able to decide that the record conclusively show[s] that [the Defendant is] not entitled to relief.” Neal v. United States, No. 94-73095, 1995 WL 325716 at *2 (6th Cir.1995) (internal quotations omitted); see Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 667 , 93 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Perry F. Neal v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 11 Neal's remaining grounds for relief are meritless for the reasons stated by the district court. 12 Accordingly, we grant Neal's motion for in forma pauperis status for the purpose of this review only.
discussed
Cited "see"
Schroeder v. McDonald
See Carson v. Block, 790 F.2d 562, 564 (7th Cir.) (“[T]he essence of a ‘collateral’ order is the absence of a final judgment on a separate document.”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 669 , 93 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
SCHROEDER v. McDONALD
See Carson v. Block, 790 F.2d 562, 564 (7th Cir.) ("[T]he essence of a 'collateral' order is the absence of a final judgment on a separate document."), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 669 , 93 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Charles M. Perry v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 10 Accordingly, the appellee's motion to dismiss is denied, Perry's motion for pauper status is granted and the district court's judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 9(b)(3), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. * The Honorable Ann Aldrich, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Dennis Richard Ashe (94-5087) David Daughtrey (94-5364)
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 90 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 667 , 93 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Carl A. Parker v. Bob Guzik
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 11 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
George Edward Patrick v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 14 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
discussed
Cited "see"
SCHROEDER v. McDONALD
See Carson v. Block, 790 F.2d 562, 564 (7th Cir.) ("[T]he essence of a 'collateral' order is the absence of a final judgment on a separate document."), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 669 , 93 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Schroeder v. McDonald
See Carson v. Block, 790 F.2d 562, 564 (7th Cir.) (“[T]he essence of a ‘collateral’ order is the absence of a final judgment on a separate document.”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 669 , 93 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Theron Dewayne Marion v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Rule 4, Rules Governing Sec. 2255 Proceedings. 12 Accordingly, the motion for in forma pauperis status is granted for the purpose of this review only.
cited
Cited "see"
Judge Jerome White v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 8 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
discussed
Cited "see"
George F. Cummings v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Bryan v. United States, 721 F.2d 572, 577 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984). 10 Accordingly, we deny the motion for the appointment of counsel and affirm the district court's judgment.
discussed
Cited "see"
Floyd R. Guinn v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Bryan v. United States, 721 F.2d 572, 577 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984). 9 Accordingly, we deny the request for oral argument and affirm the district court's order.
cited
Cited "see"
Farrel Maurice Wilson v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 90, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Elery McQueen v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 10 Moreover, as noted by the district court, McQueen was not entitled to review under Sec. 2255 of claims that could have been brought on direct appeal unless he had shown cause for and actual prejudice from his failure to do so.
discussed
Cited "see"
Frankie Lasalle v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 90 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); United States v. Walsh, 733 F.2d 31, 35 (6th Cir.1984). 8 Accordingly, the request for counsel is denied, and the district court's order denying relief under Sec. 2255 is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Oliver William Davis v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Johnny Smith v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Rule 4, Rules Governing Sec. 2255 Proceedings. 8 Smith's claim that the phrase "any person" as used in the Controlled Substances Act, under which he was indicted and convicted, is ambiguous and must be defined in light of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is patently baseless.
discussed
Cited "see"
James Charles Wood v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Bryan v. United States, 721 F.2d 572, 577 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984). 10 Upon further review, we conclude that Wood's Sec. 2255 motion was properly dismissed as an abuse of the writ insofar as he asserted a Fifth Amendment claim.
cited
Cited "see"
Raymond K. Evans v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Short v. United States, 504 F.2d 63, 65 (6th Cir.1974) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert Earthman v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 5 The district court properly found that there has been no change in the law requiring the reconsideration of the issue raised and decided on direct appeal.
cited
Cited "see"
Steven Allmond v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Bosko Radonjich, George Pape
See United States v. Ciambrone, 787 F.2d 799, 806 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 668 , 93 L.Ed.2d 720 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Michael Allan Gray v. John Jabe
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 6 Gray has not shown cause because his appellate counsel's failure to raise meritless claims was not constitutionally deficient.
discussed
Cited "see"
George Richard Haff v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Bryan v. United States, 721 F.2d 572, 577 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984). 7 Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis for the purposes of this appeal only, deny the remaining requests for relief, and affirm the district court's judgment.
cited
Cited "see"
Omar Dario Ocampo-Bedoya v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Abelardo Padilla
See United States v. Smith, 789 F.2d 196, 200 (3d Cir.) (existence of single conspiracy is question of fact for jury which must be sustained on substantial evidence), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 668 , 93 L.Ed.2d 720 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Tommie L. Fears v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Gertie Crismon v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Daniel S. Gahagan v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986); Bryan v. United States, 721 F.2d 572, 577 (6th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1038 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
ca9 1992
See Wilcox v. First Interstate Bank of Oregon, 815 F.2d 522 , 529 (9th Cir.1987). 13 Sever's fourth amended complaint alleged that APC was the enterprise, and that the individual officers and employees of APC were the "persons." Relying on Data Controls North, Inc. v. Financial Corp. of America, Inc., 688 F.Supp. 1047 (D.Md.1988), aff'd, 875 F.2d 314 (4th Cir.1989), the district court held that this form of allegation did not satisfy the person/enterprise distinction because "there is no distinction between the officers, agents and employees who operate the corporation and the corporation itse…
discussed
Cited "see"
James Daugherty v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 5 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed for the reasons set forth extensively in the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge filed March 9, 1992, and adopted by the district court in its orders of March 23, 1992, and April 14, 1992.
discussed
Cited "see"
German Hernandez v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 6 Accordingly, the request for appointment of counsel is denied, and the district court's order is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Mario Alberto Vallejo
See United States v. Benny, 786 F.2d 1410, 1416 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 , 107 S.Ct. 668 , 93 L.Ed.2d 720 (1986) (invited error doctrine).
discussed
Cited "see"
Benny Michael Brown v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 9 Accordingly, the district court's order, entered February 28, 1992, adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, filed November 12, 1991, and dismissing the motion to vacate sentence, is hereby affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Danny Zane Gray v. United States
See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 92 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1017 (1986). 8 For these reasons, we affirm the district court's dismissal of this motion.
Gill
v.
United States and Bruno v. United States
v.
United States and Bruno v. United States
No. 85-2028; No. 85-7100.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 15, 1986.
Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (1)
C. A. 8d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 791 F. 2d 922.