green
Positive treatment
2.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Blanton v. Quarterman
See Chavez v. Cockrell, 310 F.3d 805, 809-10 (5th Cir.2002) (holding a complaint that the accidental activation of the defendant’s stun belt during trial deprived defendant of the presumption of innocence was foreclosed by Teague), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 915 , 123 S.Ct. 1501 , 155 L.Ed.2d 241 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see"
Martinez Perez v. Dretke
Regarding our requisite threshold inquiry, we recognize that, in ruling on the merits, the district court was required by AEDPA to defer to the state court’s ruling “on the merits” for a claim, “unless [that] adjudication ... resulted in”: (1) for questions of law and mixed questions of law and fact, “a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States”; or (2) for questions of fact, “a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in [the] l…
discussed
Cited "see"
Perez v. Dretke
Courtroom Security In his second claim, petitioner contends that the presence of a plainclothes officer near the witness stand during the testimony of Jesse “Chuy” Torres and Frank Esparza violated his right to due process. 5 A. Applicable Law “The presumption of innocence, although not articulated in the Constitution, is a basic component of a fair trial under our system of criminal justice.” Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 503 , 96 S.Ct. 1691 , 48 L.Ed.2d 126 (1976); accord Chavez v. Cockrell, 310 F.3d 805, 808 (5th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 915 , 123 S.Ct. 1501 , 155 L.Ed…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Santos
And where there is evidence that the defendant had knowledge of the conspiracy and knowingly took actions advancing the conspiracy’s aims, we ordinarily will permit the jury “to infer intent and agreement from knowledge,” particularly in the context of the defendant’s “interested cooperation, stimulation, and instigation,” or when the defendant has a “stake in the venture.” United States v. Zambrano, 776 F.2d 1091, 1095 (2d Cir.1985) (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Direct Sales Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 703, 712-13 , 63 S.Ct. 1265 , 87 L.Ed. 1674 (1943)); see al…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Julian
v.
United States
v.
United States
02-8824.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 10, 2003.
Published
JULIAN
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 02-8824.
Supreme Court of United States.
March 10, 2003.
1
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT.
2
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.