Fortune Odend'hal, Jr., V, 471 U.S. 1143 (1985). · Go Syfert
Search
Fortune Odend'hal, Jr., V, 471 U.S. 1143 (1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
142 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 23 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Rose v. State (fla, 1996-03-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
cited Cited "see" Rose v. State
Fla. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Rose v. State, 461 So.2d 84, 85 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Vickers (2×)
Ariz. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392, 397 , 694 P.2d 222, 227 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); State v. Lee, 142 Ariz. 210 , 689 P.2d 153 (1984); see also Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
cited Cited "see" State v. Quick
Ariz. Ct. App. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392 , 694 P.2d 222 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Koedatich (2×)
N.J. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Rose v. State, 461 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 1984) (trial court's reliance on aggravating factor at resentencing that was not found at initial proceeding did not violate double jeopardy), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed. 2d 706 (1985); Zant v. Redd, 249 Ga. 211 , 290 S.E. 2d 36 (1982) (where *528 defendant's death sentence was overturned on appeal, State could resubmit at resentencing aggravating factors charged but not found to exist at original trial), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed. 2d 1398 (1983); State v. David, 468 So. 2d 1133 (La. 1985) (jury fin…
discussed Cited "see" Smith v. C.I.R.
4th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See Odend'hal v. Commissioner, 748 F.2d 908 , 913 (4th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 (1985) ("a taxpayer may not claim an interest deduction where he has neither personal liability nor economic incentive to pay" the debt).
discussed Cited "see" State v. LaGrand (2×)
Ariz. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
State v. Rossi, 146 Ariz. 359, 364 , 706 P.2d 371, 376 (1985); see State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392, 397 , 694 P.2d 222, 227 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see" State v. LaGrand (2×)
Ariz. · 1987 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392, 405 , 694 P.2d 222, 235 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Geralds v. State
Fla. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence low
"While death penalty cases command [the Court's] closest scrutiny, it is still the obligation of an appellate court to review with caution the exercise of experienced discretion by a trial judge in matters such as a motion for a continuance." Cooper v. State, 336 So.2d 1133, 1138 (Fla.1976); see also Rose v. State, 461 So.2d 84, 87 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Rupe v. Hannigan
D. Kan. · 1992 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Davis v. Kemp, 752 F.2d 1515, 1521, n. 10 (11th Cir.) (en banc) cert. denied 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Lavers (2×)
Ariz. · 1991 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392, 404 , 694 P.2d 222, 234 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
cited Cited "see, e.g." State v. Fierroa
Ariz. · 1990 · signal: see also · confidence low
Id.; see also State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392 , 694 P.2d 222 , cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); State v. Libberton, 141 Ariz. 132 , 685 P.2d 1284 (1984).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hursey Davis v. Warden, Joliet Correctional Institution at Stateville Michael Lane, Director, Department of Corrections, State of Illinois (2×)
7th Cir. · 1989 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Turner v. Fouche, 396 U.S. 346, 349 , 90 S.Ct. 532, 534 , 24 L.Ed.2d 567 (1970); see also Davis v. Zant, 721 F.2d 1478 , 1481 nn. 2, 3 & 4 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 , 707 (1983); Gibson v. Zant, 705 F.2d 1543 , 1545 nn. 2 & 3 (11th Cir.1983); People v. Jones, 9 Cal.3d 546 , 510 P.2d 705, 707 , 108 Cal.Rptr. 345, 347 (1973).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Pleasant Summit Land Corp. v. Commissioner
3rd Cir. · 1988 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Odend’hal v. Commissioner, 748 F.2d 908 , 912-14 (4th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 3552 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); Estate of Franklin v. Commissioner, 544 F.2d 1045, 1049 (9th Cir.1976).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." ca3 1988
3rd Cir. · 1988 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Odend'hal v. Commissioner, 748 F.2d 908 , 912-14 (4th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 3552 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985); Estate of Franklin v. Commissioner, 544 F.2d 1045, 1049 (9th Cir.1976). 57 Section 163(a) of the Internal Revenue Code allows a deduction for all interest paid or accrued within the taxable year on indebtedness.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Harold Glenn Williams v. Ralph Kemp, Warden, Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center, Respondent
11th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see also · confidence low
“This Circuit recognizes harmless error in two situations: (1) where the erroneous instruction was applied to an *1284 element of the crime that was not at issue in the trial, or (2) where the evidence of the defendant’s guilt was overwhelming.” Dick v. Kemp, 883 F.2d 1448 , 1451 (11th Cir.1987) (quoting Dix v. Kemp, 832 F.2d 546 (11th Cir.1987) (en banc)); see also Davis v. Kemp, 752 F.2d 1515, 1521 (11th Cir.) (en banc) (pre-Rose case), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dennis Dick v. Ralph Kemp, Warden
11th Cir. · 1987 · signal: see also · confidence low
This Circuit recognizes harmless error in two situations: “(1) where the erroneous instruction was applied to an element of the crime that was not at issue in the trial, or (2) where the evidence as to defendant’s guilt was overwhelming.” Bowen/Dix; see also Davis v. Kemp, 752 F.2d 1515, 1521 (11th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (1985).
cited Cited "see, e.g." State v. Tapia
Ariz. · 1986 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also State v. Nash, 143 Ariz. 392 , 694 P.2d 222 (1985), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 706 (explicitly adopting both prongs of Strickland).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bush v. Stephenson
E.D.N.C. · 1986 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Davis v. Kemp, 752 F.2d 1515, 1517-18 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1143 , 105 S.Ct. 2689 , 86 L.Ed.2d 707 (1985); Mason v. Balkcom, 669 F.2d 222, 225-26 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied 460 U.S. 1016 , 103 S.Ct. 1260 , 75 L.Ed.2d 487 (1983).
Fortune Odend'hal, Jr., V
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 3, 1985.
471 U.S. 1143
Published

471 U.S. 1143

105 S.Ct. 3552

86 L.Ed.2d 706

Fortune ODEND'HAL, Jr., et al., petitioners,
v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.* No.84-1307. Supreme Court of the United States June 3, 1985 The motion to substitute Harry R. Smith, Jr., as Personal Representative of Estate of Ivan V. Magal, deceased, as a party petitioner is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied. ----------* Editor's Note: This memorandum decision was previously published at 105 S.Ct. 2688. It is republished as corrected. National Farmers Union Ins. Companies v. Crow Tribe of [105SCt1965,471US1301,85LEd2d472] 105 S.Ct. 1965 471 U.S. 1301 85 L.Ed.2d 472 NATIONAL FARMERS UNION INSURANCE COMPANIES and Lodge Grass School District No. 27, Applicants, v. CROW TRIBE OF INDIANS et al.

No. A-778.

April 24, 1985.

Justice REHNQUIST, Circuit Justice.

1

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has stayed all proceedings with respect to this case in the United States District Court and in the Crow Tribal Court pending resolution of the merits of the case by this Court. Applicants contend that the Court of Appeals was without jurisdiction to issue the stay, and request me to "dissolve" the stay issued by the Court of Appeals. The jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to issue the stay order is indeed debatable, but I do not believe that four Members of the Court would wish to review that separate issue in addition to resolving the merits of the principal case argued on April 16th. Nor do I believe that the equities favor a stay to preserve the posture between the parties that applicants seek, given the present state of affairs in the District and Tribal Courts. Decision of the merits by this Court may ordinarily be expected before the summer recess around July 1st, and the stay issued by the Court of Appeals will expire by its own terms upon the happening of that event. The application is therefore denied.