green
Positive treatment
5.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ortega
See id. (“Because the defendants' vehicles were not detained beyond the measure of time required for the officer to complete his examination of the defendants’ documents, the purpose for which we assume the defendants were lawfully detained, we hold that there was not a “seizure” of the defendants’ vehicles for purposes of facilitating the canine sniff.”). 27 .United States v. Garcia, 52 F.Supp.2d 1239, 1253 (D.Kan.1999) (citing United States v. Williams, 726 F.2d 661, 663 (10th Cir.1984), ce rt. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3523 , 82 L.Ed.2d 830 (1984)). 28 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hartsock
See Jackson, 57 F.3d at 1016 (“[WJhere affirmative defenses are created through statutory exceptions, the ultimate burden of persuasion remains with the prosecution, but the defendant has the burden of going forward with sufficient evidence to raise the exception as an issue.”) (quoting United States v. Laroche, 723 F.2d 1541, 1543 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3521 , 82 L.Ed.2d 829 (1984)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Garcia
See United States v. Shayesteh, 166 F.3d 349 , 1998 WL 839083 (10th Cir.1998) (“An alert by a certified narcotics sniffing dog provides probable cause for a search and arrest.”) (citing United States v. Williams, 726 F.2d 661, 663 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3523 , 82 L.Ed.2d 830 (1984)), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 119 S.Ct. 1347 , 143 L.Ed.2d 510 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Enriques-Hernandez
See United States v. Williams, 726 F.2d 661, 663 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 (1984); see also United States v. De Los Santos Ferrer, 999 F.2d 7, 10 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 997 (1993); United States v. Waltzer, 682 F.2d 370, 372 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1210 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bartelho
See Jackson, 57 F.3d ___ _______ at 1016 ("[W]here affirmative defenses are created through statutory exceptions, the ultimate burden of persuasion remains with the prosecution, but the defendant has the burden of going forward with sufficient evidence to raise the exception as an issue.") (quoting United States v. Laroche, 723 F.2d 1541 , 1543 _____________ _______ (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 (1984)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bartelho
See Jackson, 57 F.3d at 1016 (“[Wjhere affirmative defenses are created through statutory exceptions, the ultimate burden of persuasion remains with the prosecution, but the defendant has the burden of going forward with sufficient evidence to raise the exception as an issue.”) (quoting United States v. Laroche, 723 F.2d 1541, 1543 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3521 , 82 L.Ed.2d 829 (1984)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Manuel Garcia
See United States v. Williams, 726 F.2d 661 , 663 *606 (10th Cir.) (not reaching defendant’s assertion that reasonable suspicion was required before police conduct dog sniff of luggage because court found there was reasonable suspicion), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3523 , 82 L.Ed.2d 830 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Mendez
See United States v. Williams, 726 F.2d 661 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3523 , 82 L.Ed.2d 830 (1984); United States v. Waltzer, 682 F.2d 370 (2d Cir.1982), ce rt. denied, 463 U.S. 1210 , 103 *130 S.Ct. 3543, 77 L.Ed.2d 1392 (1983); United States v. Race, 529 F.2d 12 (1st Cir.1976). 6 .
cited
Cited "see"
P-F
See United States v. Laroche, 723 F.2d 1541 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 (1984). 663 Interim Decision #3201 not receive a sentence enhancement for use of a firearm.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Scott E. Smith
See United States v. Laroche, 723 F.2d 1541 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3521 , 82 L.Ed.2d 829 (1984); United States v. Mayo, 705 F.2d 62 (2d Cir.1983).
cited
Cited "see"
Andre Kliczak v. United States
See Berry v. Mintzes, 726 F.2d 1142, 1146-50 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 (1984). 6 Accordingly, Kliczak's motion for counsel is denied and the district court's judgment is affirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Sidney Allen Worthen v. Larry R. Meachum, Director Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
See Berry v. Mintzes, 726 F.2d 1142, 1149 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3520 , 82 L.Ed.2d 828 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Frederick Spalla v. Dale Foltz
See Berry v. Mintzes, 529 F.Supp. 1067, 1075 (E.D.Mich.1981), aff'd, 726 F.2d 1142 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1245 , 104 S.Ct. 3520 , 82 L.Ed.2d 828 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tatum v. State
See Quiroz v. Wawrzaszek, 749 F.2d 1375 (9th Cir.1984), cert, denied, 471 U.S. 1055 , 105 S.Ct. 2119 , 85 L.Ed.2d 483 (1985) (due process requires that the defendant know the range of punishment; requirement of a judicial admonishment is prophylactic); Jones v. Parke, 734 F.2d 1142, 1148 (6th Cir.1984) (it is advisable for trial judge to inquire whether the defendant understands the consequences of his plea on the record); Nelson v. Callahan, 721 F.2d 397, 400 (1st Cir.1983) (where defendant was not advised by the trial court or his attorney on the range of punishment, issue becomes whether de…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lipscomb
v.
Michigan
v.
Michigan
No. 83-6630.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 11, 1984.
Published
Sup. Ct. Mich. Cer-tiorari denied.