green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.0 score
“learly, an affidavit incorporated into a warrant by express reference and attached to and accompanying the warrant can cure ambiguity in the warrant itself”
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. One Parcel of Property Located at 18 Perkins Road
learly, an affidavit incorporated into a warrant by express reference and attached to and accompanying the warrant can cure ambiguity in the warrant itself
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Pair
See United States v. Roy, 771 F.2d 54, 58 (2d Cir.1985) (holding that a prisoner who was serving a sentence on a Connecticut conviction could invoke the protections of the *171 IAD in response to a federal detainer because “[t]he fact that additional Connecticut charges were pending against him did not diminish his interests in his rehabilitation and in avoiding the adverse consequences on the conditions of his confinement caused by the filing of a detainer”), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1520 , 89 L.Ed.2d 918 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Washington v. Meachum
See United States v. Roy, 734 F.2d 108, 111 (2d Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S. Ct. 1520 , 89 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Picker International, Inc. v. Leavitt
See United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963, 977 (3rd Cir.1985), cert. denied sub nom., Murphy v. United States, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1518 , 89 L.Ed.2d 916 (1986) (out-of-court statements contained in public records require a separate hearsay exception before they can be admitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
U.S. v. Deshaw
Accord, United States v. Boldin, 772 F.2d 719 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1048 , 106 S.Ct. 1269 , 89 L.Ed.2d 577 , 475 U.S. 1098 , 106 S.Ct. 1498 , 89 L.Ed.2d 899 , 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1520 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986); United States v. Thomas, 757 F.2d 1359 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 819 , 479 U.S. 818 , 106 S.Ct. 66 , 67, 107 S.Ct. 78 , 88 L.Ed.2d 54 , 93 L.Ed.2d 34 (1985). 26 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Herring
This court has held that “[rjeversal on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct requires that the misconduct be ‘so pronounced and persistent that it permeates the entire atmosphere of the trial.’ ” United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457, 1462 (11th Cir.1987) (quoting United States v. Blevins, 555 F.2d 1236, 1240 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1016 , 98 S.Ct. 733 , 54 L.Ed.2d 761 (1978)); see United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522 (11th Cir.1985), modified and reh’g denied, 778 F.2d 673 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986); Un…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Herring
After reviewing the comment in the context in which it was made, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the prosecutor's comment was not manifestly intended to comment on Carter's right not to testify. 26 The appellants also contend that the following acts constituted prosecutorial misconduct: (1) the prosecutor discussed Agent Mitchell's testimony with Agent Glass before Agent Glass testified, in violation of the rule of exclusion of witnesses; (2) the prosecutor lied concerning the fact that she had discussed Agent Mitchell's testimony with Agent Gla…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Thomas
It allows a document to be authenticated by “proof that it was sent in reply to a duly authenticated writing.” Weinstein’s Evidence Manual, paragraph 8.01[5](e); see United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1533 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986) (telex message “prima facie authentic” if responsive to prior properly admitted communication).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Dale Scott Hunnewell
See United States v. Roy, 771 F.2d 54, 55 (2d Cir.1985), ce rt. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1520 , 89 L.Ed.2d 918 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Amos
See United States v. Roy, 734 F.2d 108, 110-12 (2d cir. 1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Billy Eugene Gossett, Jr., United States of America v. William Rector
See United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1540 (11th Cir.1985) (denial of severance upheld when district court properly excluded portions of testimony of prosecution’s witnesses, and limited cross-examination of the witness by co-defendant to avoid possible prejudice), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986); United States v. Caldwell, 543 F.2d 1333, 1357-58 (D.C.Cir.1974) (denial of severance upheld when district court correctly excluded anticipated prejudicial testimony of co-defendant’s expert witness), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1087 , 96 S.Ct. 877 , 47 L.…
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert Suris General Contractor Corp. v. New Metropolitan Federal Savings & Loan Association
See United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1536-37 (11th Cir.), modified, 778 F.2d 673 (1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986) (to state claim under RICO plaintiff must prove defendant committed at least two predicate acts constituting pattern of racketeering activity).
discussed
Cited "see"
Robert Suris General Contractor Corp. v. New Metropolitan Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
See United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1536-37 (11th Cir.), modified, 778 F.2d 673 (1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986) (to state claim under RICO plaintiff must prove defendant committed at least two predicate acts constituting pattern of racketeering activity).
cited
Cited "see"
United Energy Owners Committee, Inc., and Robert T. Gilleran v. United States Energy Management Systems, Inc.
See United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522 (11th Cir.1985) [, cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986)].
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Angelo Amen, Mark A. Deleonardis, Michael Paradiso and Oreste Abbamonte, Jr.
See United States v. Roy, 734 F.2d 108, 111 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1520 , 89 L.Ed.2d 918 (1986) (legitimate privacy expectations “severely curtailed” during incarceration); Christman v. Skinner, 468 F.2d 723, 726 (2d Cir.1972) (monitoring detainees’ conversation with visitors not violative of privacy right).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Artis
Fed.R.Evid. 802; Bruton, 391 U.S. at 125 , 88 S.Ct. at 1622 ; see also United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963, 982 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1518 , 89 L.Ed.2d 916 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Collins
See, e.g., United States v. Roy, 771 F.2d 54, 57-58 (2d Cir.1985) (noting that, where the defendant was concurrently serving a sentence imposed pursuant to a conviction, the pendency of charges against the defendant did not diminish his interest in his rehabilitation), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1520 , 89 L.Ed.2d 918 (1986); United States v. Ford, 550 F.2d 732, 737-10 (2d Cir.1977), aff'd sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mark A. Wood
See United States v. Pollock, 726 F.2d 1456, 1466 (9th Cir.1984); see also United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1531 , amended on other grounds, 778 F.2d 673 (11th Cir.1985), and cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Robert H. Zeman
Id; see also United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963, 977 (3d Cir.1985) (statements sounded like code to uninitiated listener) (cited with approval in Graham ), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 (1986). 22 In this case, the witness, clearly antagonistic to the government, was highly evasive and failed to recollect details, including words used.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mervyn Harold Cross A/K/A Eric Cross, and Robert Carter Lodge
See also United States v. Weinstein, 762 F.2d 1522, 1535 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1519 , 89 L.Ed.2d 917 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gatto
See also United States v. De Peri, 778 F.2d 963 (3d Cir.1985) (defendant not entitled to severance merely because evidence against code-fendant more damaging than against him or her), cert. denied sub nom., Pede v. United States, 475 U.S. 1110 , 106 S.Ct. 1518 , 89 L.Ed.2d 916 (1986); United States v. Sebetich, 776 F.2d 412, 427 (3d Cir.1985) (neither disparity in evidence nor evidence more damaging to one defendant than another entitles less culpable defendant to severance), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1017 , 108 S.Ct. 725 , 98 L.Ed.2d 673 (1988).
Pecic
v.
United States and Murphy v. United States
v.
United States and Murphy v. United States
No. 85-1495; No. 85-1502.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 7, 1986.
Cited by 8 opinions | Published
Citer courts: D. Connecticut (1)
C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 778 F. 2d 963.