green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
10.4 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Chaney
we should assume that did not need to be reminded that he could not consider gilliam's confession unless he found that confession voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Whittington v. State
as gilliam did not object to the course of action proposed by the prosecution and taken by the court, and 538 apparently indicated his agreement with it, he cannot now be heard to complain that the trial court's action was wrong.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ndunguru v. State
See Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 691 , 629 A.2d 685 (1993) (“As [defendant] did not object to the course of action ... taken by the court, and apparently indicated his agreement with it, he cannot now be heard to complain that the court’s action was wrong.”), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994); Watkins v. State, 328 Md. 95, 99-100 , 613 A.2d 379 (1992) (where party acquiesces in court’s ruling, there is no basis for appeal of that ruling), overruled on other grounds, Calloway v. State, 414 Md. 616 , 996 A.2d 869 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Newton
Accord Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 691 , 629 A.2d 685 (1993) (“As [defendant] did not object to the course of action proposed by the prosecution and taken by the court, and apparently indicated his agreement with it, he cannot now be heard to complain that the court’s action was wrong.”), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994); Watkins v. State, 328 Md. 95, 99-100 , 613 A.2d 379 (1992) (where party acquiesces in court’s ruling, there is no basis for appeal of that ruling), overruled on other grounds, Calloway v. State, 414 Md. 616 , 996 A.2d 869 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gilmer v. State
See Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 691 , 629 A.2d 685 (1993) (“As Gilliam did not object to the course of action proposed by the prosecution and taken by the court, and apparently indicated his agreement with it, he cannot now be heard to complain that the court’s action was wrong.”), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kevin Wiggins v. Sewall Smith, Warden
See Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651 , 680—82, 629 A. 2d 685 , 700—02 (1993), cert. denied, 510 U. S. 1077 . . . (1994); Burger v. Kemp, 483 U. S. 776 , 788—96 . . . (1987)." Id., at 610, 724 A. 2d, at 16 . 78 The state court having adjudicated Wiggins' Sixth Amendment claim on the merits, 28 U. S. C. §2254 (d) bars habeas relief unless the state-court decision "was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States," §2254(d)(1), or "was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in li…
discussed
Cited "see"
Wiggins v. Smith, Warden
(2×)
See Gilliam v. State, 381 Md. 651, 680-82 , 629 A. 2d 685, 700-02 (1993), cert. denied, 510 U. S. 1077 . . . (1994); Burger v. Kemp, 483 U. S. 776 , 788-96 . . . (1987).” Id., at 610, 724 A. 2d, at 16 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Wiggins v. State
(2×)
See Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 680-82 , 629 A.2d 685, 700-02 (1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994); Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 788-96 , 107 S.Ct. 3114, 3122-26 , 97 L.Ed.2d 638, 653-58 (1987).
cited
Cited "see"
Frederick W. McKee Petitioner-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. United States of America, Respondent-Appellant-Cross-Appellee
See United States v. Harwood, 998 F.2d 91, 93 (2d Cir.1993), ce rt. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 893 , 127 L.Ed.2d 86 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. DeLeon
See United States v. Coleman, 997 F.2d 1101, 1106 (5th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 893 , 127 L.Ed.2d 86 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Irizarry
"When there is conflicting expert evidence on the issue of criminal responsibility, the [trier of fact] is generally free to accept or reject, in whole or in part, the opinion of any expert, at least in the absence of a ' "serious flaw” ’ in the expert’s testimony” (People v Smith, 217 AD2d 221, 234-235 , lv denied 87 NY2d 977 ; see, People v James, 191 AD2d 957, 958 , lv denied 82 NY2d 720 , cert denied 510 US 1077 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Brigido Marmolejo, Jr. And Mario Salinas
(2×)
See United States v. Coleman, 997 F.2d 1101, 1105 (5th Cir.1993) ("Rulings limiting the scope or extent of cross-examination are committed to the sound discretion of the trial court and are reviewed only for abuse of discretion."), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 893 , 127 L.Ed.2d 86 (1994); United States v. Vela, 673 F.2d 86, 90 (5th Cir.1982) (stating that we review a trial court's decision to admit business records for abuse of discretion). 28 The majority cites Westmoreland to support its claim that the statutory language is unambiguous.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Marmolejo
See United States v. Coleman, 997 F.2d 1101, 1105 (5th Cir.1993) ("Rulings limiting the scope or extent of cross-examination are committed to the sound discretion of the trial court and are reviewed only for abuse of discretion."), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 893 , 127 L.Ed.2d 86 (1994); United States v. Vela, 673 F.2d 86, 90 (5th Cir.1982) (stating that we review a trial court's decision to admit business records for abuse of discretion). 29 The majority cites Westmoreland to support its claim that the statutory language is unambiguous.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Branch v. State
See, e.g., Trepal v. State, 621 So.2d 1361 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 892 , 127 L.Ed.2d 85 (1994).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Howard v. State
See also Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 673 , 629 A.2d 685 (1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994) (judges are presumed to know the law and apply it correctly).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Oken v. State
(2×)
Williams v. State, 326 Md. 367, 373 , 605 A.2d 103, 106 (1992); see also Gilliam v. State, 331 Md. 651, 665-66 , 629 A.2d 685, 692 (1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1077 , 114 S.Ct. 891 , 127 L.Ed.2d 84 (1994) (Gilliam II) .
Dobson
v.
Gabriel
v.
Gabriel
93-6845.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 18, 1994.
Dobson
v.
Gabriel et al.
No. 93-6845.
Supreme Court of United States.
January 18, 1994.
1
Appeal from the C. A. 3d Cir.
2
Certiorari denied. Reported below: 998 F. 2d 1002.