Lombera-Camorlinga v. United States, 531 U.S. 991 (2000). · Go Syfert
Lombera-Camorlinga v. United States, 531 U.S. 991 (2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“state-court petition ... that is filed following the expiration of the limitations period cannot toll that period because there is no period remaining to be tolled”
59 citation events (59 in the last 25 years) across 19 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Curiel v. Fleker (cacd, 2008-04-03)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Curiel v. Fleker
C.D. Cal. · 2008 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
state-court petition ... that is filed following the expiration of the limitations period cannot toll that period because there is no period remaining to be tolled
discussed Cited "see" Hamilton v. Secretary, DOC
11th Cir. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir.) (per curiam) (finding that even properly filed state-court petitions must be pending in order to toll the limitations period, and that a state court petition that is filed “following the expiration of the limitations period cannot toll that period because there is no period remaining to be tolled”), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 454 (2000).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Pedro Luis Christopher Tinoco
11th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Krilich, 209 F.3d 968, 972 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 992 , 121 S.Ct. 482 , 148 L.Ed.2d 455 (2000) (discussing such elements).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Quezada (2×)
9th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Percy, 250 F.3d 720, 728 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, -U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 493 , 151 L.Ed.2d 405 (2001) (reviewing for plain error when defendant did not object at trial to prosecutor’s asserted misconduct and stating that plain error is one that affects substantial rights). . 206 F.3d 882 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 455 (2000). . 222 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir.2000). .
discussed Cited "see" Casey Bridges v. Curtis Johnson
11th Cir. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir.) (holding that a state court petition filed after the expiration of the AEDPA’s one-year limitations period cannot toll that period “because there is no period remaining to be tolled”), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 454 (2000). 2 .
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Rueth Development Co.
N.D. Ind. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Krilich, 209 F.3d 968, 972 (7th Cir.2000) (“[T]he interstate connection, i.e. that the waters involved were ‘waters of the United States,’ is merely an element of the United States’ Clean Water Act case under section 301.”), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 992 , 121 S.Ct. 482 , 148 L.Ed.2d 455 (2000); see also United States v. Wilson, 133 F.3d 251, 264 (4th Cir.1997) (indicating proof of interstate nexus is an element of criminal liability under CWA); United States v. Ahmad, 101 F.3d 386, 391 (5th Cir.1996) (recognizing the existence of “purely jurisdictional elements�…
cited Cited "see" Hill v. Randle
6th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 454 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Owens v. Stine
6th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 454 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Winters v. Edwards
6th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 121 S.Ct. 481 , 148 L.Ed.2d 454 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Alejandro Bustos De La Pava (2×)
2d Cir. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
See United States v. Page, 232 F.3d 536, 540-41 (6th Cir. 2000) cert. denied, — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 2202 , 149 L.Ed.2d 1032 ; United States v. Cordoba- Mosquera, 212 F.3d 1194, 1195-96 (11th Cir.2000) (per curiam), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1131 , 121 S.Ct. 893 , 148 L.Ed.2d 800 (2001); Nai Fook Li, 206 F.3d at 61-62 ; see also United States v. Lombera-Camorlinga, 206 F.3d 882, 887-88 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) (holding that the failure to comply with Article 36(l)(b) did not warrant exclusion of post-arrest statements made by a foreign detainee to the prosecution), cer t. denied, 531 U.S. 991 , 12…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lombera-Camorlinga
v.
United States
No. 99-9927.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 13, 2000.
531 U.S. 991

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.