green
Positive treatment
5.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Moliga
See Caruso v. United States Board of Parole, 570 F.2d 1150 (3d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978); Anglian v. Sowders, 566 S.W.2d 789 (Ky.App.1978); Bush v. Canary, 286 N.W.2d 536 (S.D.1979). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Anderson J. Coleman
See United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827, 831 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
cadc 1984
See United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Hobson v. Wilson
See United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
Hargrave v. Landon
See Satterfield v. Zahradnick, 572 F.2d 443, 446 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2270 , 56 L.Ed.2d 762 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Kent Borden Rogers, United States of America v. Jacob N. Peilte
See United States v. Pallan, 571 F.2d 497, 501 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978); United-States v. Mays, 549 F.2d 670, 680 (9th Cir.1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Yates
(2×)
App.3d 68, 73 ; see Appeal of Maguire (1st Cir.1978), 571 F.2d 675 , cert. denied (1978), 436 U.S. 911 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Edgar Cherry Gant
See id. at 410-11 & n. 8, 100 S.Ct. at 634 -35 & n. 8 (citing People v. Richards, 269 Cal.App.2d 768 , 75 Cal.Rptr. 597 (1969), and United States v. Boomer, 571 F.2d 543, 545 (10th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Heft v. United States, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2250 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978), for the minimum showings needed to justify a prison escape).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Vasquez
See Appeal of Maguire, 571 F.2d 675, 677 (1st cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 (1978); Com. v. Sexton, 400 A.2d 1289, 1292 (Pa. 1979).
cited
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grant H. ROYLANCE, Defendant-Appellant
See United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827, 834 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Juvenile Appeal
More importantly, although it appears as if all parties at the hearing below treated the defenses of duress and necessity as one, neither defense will be successful, as the United States Supreme Court has held, “if there was a reasonable, legal alternative to violating the law, ‘a chance both to refuse to do the criminal act and also to avoid the threatened harm.’ ” United States v. Bailey, supra, 410 , citing LaFave & Scott, Handbook on Criminal Law 379 (1972). 10 Upon a review of all the circumstances of this case, even taking into consideration all of the defendant’s requested fin…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Powers
See United States v. Pallan, 571 F.2d 497, 501 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978); United States v. Seawell, 550 F.2d 1159, 1164 (9th Cir. 1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Jay Lynott v. J. D. Henderson, Warden, Etc.
See U. S. ex rel Caruso v. U. S. Board of Parole, 570 F.2d 1150, 1152-53 (CA3), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Taylor
Order, ¶ 4, Cr.No. 79-13-1 (April 3,1979); see United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978); United States v. Rosa, 560 F.2d 149 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 862 , 98 S.Ct. 191 , 54 L.Ed.2d 135 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Stokes
See id. at 575 (“The loss of the [9-1-1] recording does not establish actual prejudice, because the asserted value of its contents is, again, entirely speculative.”); see also United States v. Pallan, 571 F2d 497, 501 (9th Cir), cert den, 436 US 911 (1978) (protection from lost testimony “ ‘generally falls solely within the ambit of the statute of limitations’ ”) (quoting 61 Minn L Rev 509, 517 (1977)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cervantes Salazar v. Dretke
See, e.g., Soria v. Johnson, 207 F.3d at 249 (“the fact that an identifiable minority group votes in a proportion lower than the rest of the population and is therefore underrepresented [sic] on jury panels presents no constitutional issue.”), quoting United States v. Brummitt, 665 F.2d 521, 527 (5th Cir.1981), ce rt. denied, 456 U.S. 977 , 102 S.Ct. 2244 , 72 L.Ed.2d 852 (1982), in turn quoting United States v. Lopez, 588 F.2d 450, 452 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 947 , 99 S.Ct. 2895 , 61 L.Ed.2d 319 (1979), in turn citing United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1297 (5th Cir.1978…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
U.S. v. Robinson
See also United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1298 (5th Cir.) (no prejudice, and thus no material variance, when an indictment alleged that defendant made false statements on a W-4 form, but defendant actually used a different form), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Sue N. Robinson
See also United States v. Arlt, 567 F.2d 1295, 1298 (5th Cir.) (no prejudice, and thus no material variance, when an indictment alleged that defendant made false statements on a W-4 form, but defendant actually used a different form), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2250 , 56 L.Ed.2d 412 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Thomas Gilsenan and Ralph Cicalese
(2×)
See also United States v. Boscia, 573 F.2d 827, 831 (3d Cir.) (“[T]he failure to provide a full evidentiary hearing into possible prejudice resulting from communications with jurors does not, in itself, require a reversal or remand.”), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2248 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lewis
The proof must be definite and not speculative: “ ‘[t]he assertion that a missing witness might have been useful does not show the ‘actual prejudice’ required by Marion.’ ” United States v. Mays, 549 F.2d 670, 677 (9th Cir.1977) (quoting United States v. Galardi, 476 F.2d 1072, 1075 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 839 , 94 S.Ct. 90 , 38 L.Ed.2d 75 , 414 U.S. 856 , 94 S.Ct. 160 , 38 L.Ed.2d 106 (1973)); see also United States v. Pallan, 571 F.2d 497 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2249 , 56 L.Ed.2d 411 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Russell Charles Hudler
See United States v. Smith, 10 Cir., 484 F.2d 8, 10 , cert. denied 415 U.S. 978 , 94 S.Ct. 1566 , 39 L.Ed.2d 874 , a case relating to the falsity of a W-4 form; see also United States v. Wellendorf, 5 Cir., 574 F.2d 1289, 1290 , United States v. Stephen, 5 Cir., 569 F.2d 860, 861 , and United States v. Arlt, 5 Cir., 567 F.2d 1295, 1298 , cert. denied 436 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 2250 , 56 L.Ed.2d 412 , all cases relating to a claim of “99” exemptions in a W-4 form.
Wakefield
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 77-6535.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 15, 1978.
Published
G. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.