Tolliver v. United States, 444 U.S. 903 (1979). · Go Syfert
Search
Tolliver v. United States, 444 U.S. 903 (1979). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
29 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Joseph Morano (ca11, 1983-02-10)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Joseph Morano
11th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
The district judge apparently admitted this evidence because it was relevant to the existence of a common plan between Morano and Ottomonelli, Fed.R.Evid. 402; see United States v. Jimenez, 600 F.2d 1172, 1173 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 903 , 100 S.Ct. 216 , 62 L.Ed.2d 140 (1979), and because its relevancy was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to Morano.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Anthony
R.I. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Reilly, 456 F.Supp. 211, 219 (E.D.Pa.1978), aff’d 601 F.2d 577 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 903 , 100 S.Ct. 216 , 62 L.Ed.2d 140 (1979) (because of importance of allowing defendant to bring out the full extent of the immunity agreement, court refrained from placing any restrictions on cross-examination of key government witness in this area); Holt v. State, 378 So.2d 106 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1980) (trial court should not have precluded defense counsel’s inquiry on cross-examination regarding details surrounding grant of immunity to primary prosecution witness); State …
cited Cited "see" United States v. Herman v. Krezdorn
5th Cir. · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Jimenez, 600 F.2d 1172, 1173 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 903 , 100 S.Ct. 216 , 62 L.Ed.2d 140 (1979).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Joel Seminole
9th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see also · confidence low
If the “fine” was actually an order for reimbursement of fees paid to Seminole’s court appointed counsel, the district court erred by not making the requisite finding that “funds are available for payment” of the fees. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(f) (1982); see also United States v. Jimenez, 600 F.2d 1172, 1174 (5th Cir.) (section 3006A(f) requires a finding that the defendant is currently able to repay fees), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 903 , 100 S.Ct. 216 , 62 L.Ed.2d 140 (1979).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Steven Wayne Tyler
9th Cir. · 1985 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare United States v. Santarpio, 560 F.2d 448, 455 (1st Cir.) (this authority embraces an order requiring the defendant to repay attorney's fees generated by his court-appointed counsel), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 984 , 98 S.Ct. 609 , 54 L.Ed.2d 478 (1977) with United States v. Jimenez, 600 F.2d 1172, 1174-75 (5th Cir.) (reaching opposite result), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 903 , 100 S.Ct. 216 , 62 L.Ed.2d 140 (1979).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tolliver
v.
United States
No. 79-5327.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 9, 1979.
444 U.S. 903
Published

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.