green
Positive treatment
6.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Lino Sanchez
But see United States v. Harper, 932 F.2d 1073 (5th Cir.) (holding, in contrast to Lee , that even when a defendant skipped bail after he had been sentenced to less than the statutory maximum, the § 2J1.6(b) enhancement of 9 levels was properly applied), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 462 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Paul SANDERS, Defendant-Appellant
(2×)
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 141 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 , 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
Donald Ray Hodges v. United States
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140-41 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1991). 6 Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Manuel (Nmi) Garcia
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1992) (district court is to sentence defendant under the Guidelines in effect on the date of sentencing). 7 Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the continuance.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Richard Blake Draper
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Helen Conwell v. United States
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1991); United States v. Heard, 810 F.Supp. 242, 244 (N.D.Ill.1993). 8 Even if it is assumed that the district court retained discretion to apply the amended version of U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b), as argued by Conwell on appeal, she would still not be entitled to resentencing.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Antonio Martinez-Ortega
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Joe D. Fernandez
(2×)
See United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1991).
cited
Cited "see"
Clark v. Collins, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
See --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Cleveland
See, e.g., United States v. Cirillo, 499 F.2d 872, 880-81 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1056 , 95 S.Ct. 638 , 42 L.Ed.2d 653 (1974) (finding that when materials submitted to court are more than adequate to show a good faith effort to achieve minimization, an evidentiary hearing need not be held unless the defendant can demonstrate that “a substantial number of nonpertinent conversations had been intercepted unreasonably”); United States v. Losing, 539 F.2d 1174 , 1180 n. 8 (8th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 969 , 98 S.Ct. 516 , 54 L.Ed.2d 457 (1977) (recognizing that district court…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joseph Stewart
(2×)
See also, United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 443 (1991); United States v. Havener, 905 F.2d 3 (1st Cir.1990); United States v. Audelo-Sanchez, 923 F.2d 129 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Paden, 908 F.2d 1229, 1236 (5th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1039 (1991). 15 We affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court's Order Regarding Sentence Reduction. 16 AFFIRMED.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Braum
Id.; see also U.S. v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Arana
See, e.g., United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991); United States v. Havener, 905 F.2d 3 (1st Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rios-Paz
Guerreo, 863 F.2d at 250 (amendments “are intended solely to enhance understanding and clarity”); Deigert, 916 F.2d at 917 (“purposes of this amendment are to correct a clerical error and to clarify the operation of the guidelines”); Restrepo, 903 F.2d at 656 (amendments “clarify the intent underlying § 1B1.3 as originally promulgated”); see also United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140 (9th Cir.1991) (noting that clarifying amendment states that it is “to clarify” the operation of the guideline), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Luis Colon
Compare United States v. Mooneyham, 938 F.2d 139, 140-41 (9th Cir.) (holding amendment 266 not retroactive), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 461 (1991) with United States v. Park, 951 F.2d 634, 636 (5th Cir.1992) (holding amendment 379 retroactive).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Johnson v. State
See, e.g., People v. Jennings , 53 Cal.3d 334 , 279 Cal.Rptr. 780 , 807 P.2d 1009 (1991), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 443 , 116 L.Ed.2d 462 (1991); Lord v. State , 107 Nev. 28 , 806 P.2d 548 (1991).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mooneyham
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 91-5559.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 18, 1991.
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.