green
Positive treatment
2.7 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. DePrima
See United States v. Mest, 789 F.2d 1069 (4th Cir.) (holding that a change in the Federal Rules of Evidence which was procedural in nature does not violate the ex post facto clause), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 846 , 107 S.Ct. 163 , 93 L.Ed.2d 102 (1986); United States v. Alexander, 805 F.2d 1458 (11th Cir.1986) (holding that new Rule 704(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence does not violate the ex post facto clause).
cited
Cited "see"
Rhoden v. State
See Teague v. State, 772 S.W.2d 915, 923-924 (Tenn.Crim.App.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 874 , 110 S.Ct. 210 , 107 S.Ct. 163 (1989); Strouth v. State, 755 S.W.2d 819, 832 (Tenn.Crim.App.1986). 22 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Roland Arthur Edwards
See United States v. Mest, 789 F.2d 1069, 1071-72 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 163 , 93 L.Ed.2d 102 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thunder Hawk Ex Rel. Jensen v. Union Pacific Railroad
GRAham, Federal Practice and Procedure: Evidence § 6651 (interim ed. 1992); see also United States v. Mest, 789 F.2d 1069, 1073-74 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 846 , 107 S.Ct. 163 , 93 L.Ed.2d 102 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sexton v. Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct
The Eighth Circuit, and several other circuits, have held that the statute could be applied retroactively “because it represented a procedural, as opposed to substantive, change in the applicable law.” U.S. v. Bartlett, 856 F.2d 1071 , 1077 n. 7 (8th Cir.1988); see also United States v. Mest, 789 F.2d 1069, 1072-73 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 846 , 107 S.Ct. 163 , 93 L.Ed.2d 102 (1986); United States v. Prickett, 790 F.2d 35, 37 (6th Cir.1986); United States v. Alexander, 805 F.2d 1458, 1461-62 (11th Cir.1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Smith
v.
Hamby, Warden
v.
Hamby, Warden
No. 85-7200.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 6, 1986.
Published
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.