green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.1 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1985 ·
…in prosecutions for violations of narcotics laws, the defendant's complicity in other similar narcotics transactions may serve to establish intent or motive to commit the crime charged.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1971
1998
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Paula Lewis, United States of America v. Gary Darnall, United States of America v. Terry Crafton, United States of America v. Ross Alan Milburn, United States of America v. Marion Milburn, United States of America v. Ross E. Milburn, United States of America v. Ronald Throop, United States of America v. Paula Throop
in prosecutions for violations of narcotics laws, the defendant's complicity in other similar narcotics transactions may serve to establish intent or motive to commit the crime charged.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Lewis
in prosecutions for violations of narcotics laws, the defendant's complicity in other similar narcotics transactions may serve to establish intent or motive to commit the crime charged.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John Conley, Jr.
(2×)
We are thus presented with still another case wherein we must decide the proper use of evidence of other crimes. 5 In this circuit, evidence of other crimes or criminal conduct is generally inadmissible, except that "(s)uch evidence is relevant to prove '(1) motive, (2) intent, (3) the absence of mistake or accident, (4) a common scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other that proof of one tends to establish the other, and (5) identity of the person charged with the commission of the crime on trial.' " United States v. Cochran, 475 F.2d 1080, 1082 (8…
discussed
Cited "see"
Estes v. State
See United States v. Lewis, 423 F.2d 457 (8th Cir. 1970), cert. denied 400 U.S. 905 , 91 S.Ct. 146 , 27 L.Ed.2d 142 .” Defendant next challenges a fourth remark of the prosecutor wherein comment was made upon defendant’s failure to call as a witness the “girlfriend” who entered the kitchen during the alleged sale.
discussed
Cited "see"
Morris Johnson, Jr. v. United States
See.United States v. Lewis, 423 F.2d 457 (8th Cir. 1970), cert, denied 400 U.S. 905 , 91 S.Ct. 146 , 27 L.Ed.2d 142 . (3) Finally, Johnson complains of Instruction No. 18: “The law does not compel a defendant in a criminal case to take the witness stand and testify, and no presumption of guilt may be raised, and no inference of any kind may be drawn from the failure of a defendant to testify.” (Emphasis supplied.) His complaint is that the word “failure” carries negative connotations and implies a dereliction of duty on his part.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. William Carey Edwards, Jr.
See United States v. Lewis, 423 F.2d 457, 459 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 905 , 91 S.Ct. 146 , 27 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970) and cases cited therein.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Matter of Dempsey
See In re M., 59 N.J. 304 , 282 A.2d 37 (1971); see also In re Chipley, 254 S.C. 588 , 176 S.E.2d 412 (1970), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 905 , 91 S.Ct. 146 , 27 L.Ed.2d 143 (1971).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Williams
v.
Perini, Correctional Superintendent
v.
Perini, Correctional Superintendent
No. 5454.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 9, 1970.
Published
Citer courts: Eighth Circuit (2)
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.