green
Positive treatment
5.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Dozier
Thus, the trial record supports the conclusion that the decision that defendant not testify was “a strategic one . . . made by defendant in consultation with counsel” (People v Borthwick, 51 AD3d 1211, 1216 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 734 [2008]; see People v White, 73 NY2d 468, 478 [1989], cert denied 493 US 859 [1989]).
cited
Cited "see"
Dean v. State
See United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 175-76 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Anthony Dejohn (02-3158) Christopher Harb (02-3175)
See United States v. Blackmon, 874 F.2d 378, 381 (6th Cir.) ("defendant is not 'arrested' for purposes of the Speedy Trial Act until formal federal charges are pending”), ce rt. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 168 , 107 L.Ed.2d 125 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Svacha v. Waldens Creek Saddle Club
See McDonald v. Onoh, 772 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn.Ct.App.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 168 , 107 L.Ed.2d 125 (1989)(“The Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure place the responsibility for the preparation of the transcript or a statement of evidence squarely on the shoulders of the parties.
discussed
Cited "see"
Kimberly J. Svacha v. Waldens Creek Saddley Club
See McDonald v. Onoh, 772 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 100 S. Ct. 168 (1989)(“The Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure place the responsibility for the preparation of the transcript or a statement of evidence squarely on the shoulders of the parties.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Reginald Pierre Beasley, United States of America v. Oliver Lawrence Beasley
See United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 176 (8th Cir.) (witness’s statement that victim’s “actual story never varied” was not hearsay as defined by Rule 801(a)), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Green
Once the prosecution stated, in its response to defendant’s omnibus motion, that it did not intend to use any identification evidence at trial, the court was obligated to grant defendant’s motion to suppress such testimony (CPL 710.60 [2] [b]; see, People v White, 73 NY2d 468, 475-476 , cert denied 493 US 859 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cook v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
See United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 177-78 (8th Cir.1989), cert. denied 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 (1989); United States v. Cardinal, 782 F.2d 34, 36 (6th Cir.1986), cert. denied 476 U.S. 1161 , 106 S.Ct. 2282 , 90 L.Ed.2d 724 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Rivera
(People v Renaud, supra, at 369 ; see, People v White, 73 NY2d 468, 477 [1989], cert denied 493 US 859 [1989] [defendant has no constitutional right to file a supplemental pro se brief); see also, People v Garcia, 69 NY2d 903 [1987] [defendant has no constitutional right to try his case pro se but have standby counsel question him on his own direct examination]; People v Ferguson, 67 NY2d 383, 390 [1986] [defendant has no constitutional right to make consent to a mistrial depend on his personal consent]; People v Mirenda, 57 NY2d 261, 265-267 [1982] [defendant has no constitutional right to ha…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Winston J. Brown
See United States v. Blackmon, 874 F.2d 378 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 and 862 (1989); United States v. Thompson, 866 F.2d 268 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 828 (1989). 6 Brown alleges that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Schnugg
This testimony at the pretrial suppression hearing was sufficient to put the defendant on notice of the People’s intent to use the statement (see, Preiser, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 11 A, CPL 710.30, at 221; see also, People v White, 73 NY2d 468 , cert denied 493 US 859 ; People v Reid, 215 AD2d 507).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Schnugg
This testimony at the pretrial suppression hearing was sufficient to put the defendant on notice of the People’s intent to use the statement (see, Preiser, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 11 A, CPL 710.30, at 221; see also, People v White, 73 NY2d 468 , cert denied 493 US 859 ; People v Reid, 215 AD2d 507 ).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Birdsall
See United States v. Azure, 801 F.2d 336, 340 (8th Cir.l986)(dicta); see also United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 176 (8th Cir.), cert, denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James T. Whitted
See United States v. Azure, 801 F.2d 336, 340 (8th Cir.1986) (dicta); see also United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 176 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jerry A. Crawford
(2×)
Certain pre-trial delays toll the seventy-day limitation, however, including all time from the filing of a motion until the conclusion of the hearing on that motion. 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(1)(F); see also United States v. Blackmon, 874 F.2d 378, 380 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 168 , 107 L.Ed.2d 125 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Tracy
(2×)
Id. at 436 ; see also United States v. Provost, 875 F.2d 172, 177 (8th Cir.1989) (affirming the Renville analysis), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 859 , 110 S.Ct. 170 , 107 L.Ed.2d 127 .
Jarrett
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 89-5065.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 2, 1989.
Published
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.