green
Positive treatment
7.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 28 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "but see"
Coates v. United States
But see Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 168 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974) (trial judge did not abuse discretion in excluding, as impermissibly speculative, expert medical testimony with respect to the effect of the ingestion of one tablet of Desoxyn, a weight control drug, on a witness’ ability to see); Durant v. United States, supra, 551 A.2d at 1328 (presence of PCP in defendant's urine held improperly admitted for purpose of calling into question defendant's ability to perceive and recall events of that date; court observed that "expert te…
cited
Cited "see"
Teoume-Lessane v. United States
See (Raymond L.) Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 167 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Chaney v. Clark County Agricultural Society, Inc.
See Brennan v. Texas City Dike & Marina, Inc., 492 F.2d 1115 , 1118 n. 8 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974)”’ Brock v. Louvers & Dampers, Inc. (C.A.6, 1987), 817 F.2d 1255, 1258 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Allen v. United States
(2×)
See Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 167 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Mitchell v. United States
We find no abuse of discretion because we are satisfied that the conflict between the co-defendants’ defenses was not of a magnitude to raise a danger that the jury would convict appellant based on this conflict alone, Tillman, supra, 519 A.2d at 170 , Ready, supra, 445 A.2d at 987 ; West v. United States, 499 A.2d 860, 867-69 (D.C.1985); see Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 166 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Coreas v. United States
(2×)
See Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 167 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974). .
discussed
Cited "see"
First Comics, Inc., and Cross-Appellee v. World Color Press, Inc., and Cross-Appellant
See Spiegel, Inc. v. Federal Trade Comm’n, 494 F.2d 59, 62 (7th Cir.1974), certiorari denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974), citing Federal Trade Comm’n v. Klesner, 280 U.S. 19, 27 , 50 S.Ct. 1, 3 , 74 L.Ed. 138 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Haynes
See Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1273-74 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 (1974); cf. United States v. Brown, 548 F.2d 1194 , 1199 n. 14 (5th Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
William E. Brock, Secretary of Labor v. Louvers and Dampers, Inc. D/B/A Bel-Wood Country Club and Ted Stacy
See Brennan v. Texas City Dike & Marina, Inc., 492 F.2d 1115 , 1118 n. 8 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ebens
See U.S. v. Angiulo, 497 F.2d 440 (1st Cir.) cert denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974); U.S. v. Marcello, 423 F.2d 993, 1004 (5th Cir.), cert denied, 398 U.S. 959 , 90 S.Ct. 2172 , 26 L.Ed.2d 543 (1970).
cited
Cited "see"
American Transfer & Storage Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America
See De Rieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321, 1332 (TECA), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Nader v. Sawhill, 514 F.2d 1064, 1068 (TECA 1975).
cited
Cited "see"
South Carolina Ex Rel. Patrick v. Block
See De Rieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321 (Em.App.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Nader v. Sawhill, 514 F.2d 1064 (Em.App.1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Parks v. United States
“In addition [to these factors], the opinion of the trial judge is entitled to some reliance since only [s]he had the opportunity to appraise the effect of the remarks in their setting.” Jenkins v. United States, D.C.App., 374 A.2d 581, 585 (citation omitted), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 894 , 98 S.Ct. 274 , 54 L.Ed.2d 182 (1977); see Smith v. United States, D.C.App., 315 A.2d 163, 167 , cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974). 42 A. The “Relay Race” Comment In arguing to the jury, attorneys should “concentrate on facts, issues and evidence,” and eschew such �…
cited
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Liakos
See Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1271-1273 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 (1974).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Engleman
See United States v. Angiulo, 497 F.2d 440 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974); United States v. Marcello, supra .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Morris
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1271-72 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 ; Cook v. United States, 379 F.2d 966, 970 (5th Cir.); see United States v. McCoy, 139 U.S.App.D.C. 60, 63 , 429 F.2d 739, 742 (D.C.Cir.).
discussed
Cited "see"
ca10 1979
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1271-72 (8th Cir.), Cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 ; Cook v. United States, 379 F.2d 966, 970 (5th Cir.); See United States v. McCoy, 139 U.S.App.D.C. 60, 63 , 429 F.2d 739, 742 (D.C.Cir.).
cited
Cited "see"
United States Steel Corp. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Republic Steel Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency
See De Rieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321, 1332 (TECA), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Nader v. Sawhill, 514 F.2d 1064, 1068 (TECA 1975).
cited
Cited "see"
Nowlin v. United States
See Smith v. United States, D.C.App., 315 A.2d 163, 168, cert. denied, Jefferies v. U. S., 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
ca8 1974
See DeRieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321 , 1333--1334 (Em.App.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Shell Oil Co. v. FPC, Supra, 491 F.2d at 87--88; National Ass'n of Ins.
discussed
Cited "see"
American Bancorporation, Inc. v. Board of Governors
See DeRieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321, 1333-1334 (Em.App.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Shell Oil Co. v. FPC, supra, 491 F.2d at 87-88; National Ass’n of Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Scott Armstrong v. George Bush
See, e.g., De Rieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321 , 1322 n. 13 (Temp.Emer.Ct.App.) (suggesting in dicta that the President is an agency under the APA), cert. denied sub nom., Five Smiths, Inc. v. Hollaway, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974); Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen v. Connally, 337 *289 F.Supp. 737, 761 (D.D.C.1971) (three-judge panel) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
ca8 1990
We consider it significant that defense counsel did not object to the supplemental charge. 41 "[S]uch an omission indicates that the potential for coercion argued now was not apparent to one on the spot." Lowenfield, 484 U.S. at 240 , 108 S.Ct. at 552 ; see also Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1273 (8th Cir.) (lack of objection by defense counsel to court's procedures in polling jury and directing jury to resume deliberations "permits an inference that the procedures utilized did not appear coercive at the time"), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hiland
We consider it significant that defense counsel did not object to the supplemental charge. 41 “[S]uch an omis sion indicates that the potential for coercion argued now was not apparent to one on the spot.” Lowenfield, 484 U.S. at 240 , 108 S.Ct. at 552 ; see also Amos v. United States, 496 F.2d 1269, 1273 (8th Cir.) (lack of objection by defense counsel to court’s procedures in polling jury and directing jury to resume deliberations “permits an inference that the procedures utilized did not appear coercive at the time”), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (197…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Robinson v. Sarisky
See, e.g., Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 167 (D.C.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Singley v. United States
(2×)
Harris v. United States, 430 A.2d 536, 542 (D.C. 1981); see also (Raymond) Smith v. United States, 315 A.2d 163, 168 (D.C.1974) (whether absence of witness has been “satisfactorily explained”), cer t. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 174 , 42 L.Ed.2d 139 (1974); German, supra, 525 A.2d at 611 (“reasonable, good faith efforts" to locate the witness). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Attorney General of the United States of America v. The Irish People, Inc.
(2×)
See, e.g., Spiegel, Inc. v. FTC, 494 F.2d 59 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974), where the Seventh Circuit upheld a hearing examiner’s quashing of petitioner’s subpoenas duces tecum since the court found that “the evidence sought was of no avail to Spiegel.” Id. at 64 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Abolghasen Osee Yassini, and Masoud Mahdjoubi v. David Crosland, Acting Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization Service
Compare DeRieux v. Five Smiths, Inc., 499 F.2d 1321, 1333 (Em.App.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 176 , 42 L.Ed.2d 141 (1974) (mere technical violation where reasons for good cause are obvious and compelling) with Kelly v. Department of Interior, 339 F.Supp. 1095, 1101 (E.D.Cal.1972) (omission is fatal).
Jeffries
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 73-1930.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 21, 1974.
Cited by 7 opinions | Published
Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.