green
Positive treatment
5.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Josephs
(2×)
See generally, United States v. Olbres, 61 F. 3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.) ("So long as the evidence, taken as a whole, warrants a judgment of conviction, `it need not rule out other hypotheses more congenial to a finding of innocence.'"), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 991 , 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed. 2d 430 (1995); United States v. Sawyer, 294 F. 2d 24, 31 (4th Cir.) (noting that prosecution is not required to exclude every hypothesis except that of guilty beyond reasonable doubt and stating that jury is responsible for weighing evidence to find guilt beyond reasonable doubt), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 916 , …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ferber
See United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.1995) (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 [1979]), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 430 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ruiz
See ___ United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.), cert. _____________ ______ _____ denied, 116 S. Ct. 522 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ruiz
See United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 430 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Olbres
See id. ___ ___ On remand, the district court determined that the tax loss caused by Mr. and Mrs. Olbres totalled $632,158, which, according to the Sentencing Guidelines' Tax Table, places the Olbres' base offense level at 15.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Santiago
See United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 430 (1995); Maraj, 947 F.2d at 522-23 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Prada Cordero
See United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.), ___ _____________ ______ cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 522 (1995); United States v. Gifford, 17 _____ ______ _____________ _______ F.3d 462, 467 (1st Cir. 1994).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Prada Cordero
See United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 970 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 522 (1995); United States v. Gifford, 17 F.3d 462, 467 (1st Cir.1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Moore v. Time Warner GRC 9
See Kotlowski v. Eastman Kodak Co., 922 F.Supp. 790, 798 (W.D.N.Y.1996); see also Misek-Falkoff v. IBM Corp. 854 F.Supp. 215 (S.D.N.Y.1994) (“Some degree of regular, predictable attendance is fundamental to most jobs”), aff'd, 60 F.3d 811 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 991 , 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 429 (1995) and 517 U.S. 1111 , 116 S.Ct. 1333 , 134 L.Ed.2d 484 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kotlowski v. Eastman Kodak Co.
Admin., 44 F.3d 538, 544 (7th Cir.1995) (Attendance and acceptance of supervision are generally considered to be essential job functions)); Carr v. Reno, 23 F.3d 525, 530 (D.C.Cir.1994) (an employee must be present in order to perform the essential functions of a job); see also Misek-Falkoff v. IBM Corp., 854 F.Supp. 215 (S.D.N.Y.1994) (“Some degree of regular, predictable attendance is fundamental to most jobs”), aff'd, 60 F.3d 811 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 429 (1995) and — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1333 , 134 L.Ed.2d 484 (1996). (iii) Kotlowski Was Not Te…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Staula
See, e.g., United States v. Olbres, 61 F.3d 967, 971 (1st Cm.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 522 , 133 L.Ed.2d 430 (1995); United States v. O’Brien, 14 F.3d 703, 707 (1st Cir.1994).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
McFarland
v.
Prince George's County, Maryland
v.
Prince George's County, Maryland
No. 95-661.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 27, 1995.
Published
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.