green
Positive treatment
3.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State of Tennessee v. Jody Lane Orr
“To justify a warrantless search of premises owned or occupied by a citizen as a residence, he must give his consent, or such consent must be given by someone authorized by him, or having a common possessory interest or right. . . .” Rippy v. State, 550 S.W.2d 636, 640 (Tenn. 1977) (apartment manager’s sister cannot consent for a tenant); see generally Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483 , 84 S. Ct. 889 , reh’g denied, 377 U.S. 940 , 84 S. Ct. 1330 (1964) (hotel clerk cannot consent for guests); Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610 , 81 S. Ct. 776 (1961) (landlord cannot consent for a…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Luckett
See People v. Ford, 60 Cal. 2d 772 , 388 P.2d 892 , 36 Cal. Rptr. 620 , cert. denied, 377 U.S. 940 (1964).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Leever
(2×)
Second, there is a split of authority in the federal courts as to whether the robbery offense described in the first paragraph of section 2113(a) requires proof of a specific intent to permanently deprive the victim of the property taken—an essential element of robbery under California law. (§ 211; People v. Plies, supra, 121 Cal.App.3d at p. 680 ; see People v. Ford (1964) 60 Cal.2d 772, 793 [ 36 Cal.Rptr. 620 , 388 P.2d 892 ], cert. den., 377 U.S. 940 [ 12 L.Ed.2d 303 , 84 S.Ct. 1342 ].) The court in Plies examined that split of authority and concluded for itself that section 2113(a) defi…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hubert Jerome Yonn, Gary Carl Weeks, Hugo Sanes-Saavedra
(2×)
See Stoner v. State of California, 376 U.S. 483 , 84 S.Ct. 889 , 11 L.Ed.2d 856 , rehearing denied, 377 U.S. 940 , 84 S.Ct. 1342 , 12 L.Ed.2d 303 (1964) (search of hotel room conducted without consent of absent guest and without search warrant was unlawful even though hotel clerk consented to the search of the room).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Schuler v. State
(2×)
See also Stoner v. State of Cal., 376 U.S. 483 , 84 S.Ct. 889 , 11 L.Ed.2d 856 , reh'g denied 377 U.S. 940 , 84 S.Ct. 1330 , 12 L.Ed.2d 303 (1964) and Fahy v. State of Conn., 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L.Ed.2d 171 (1963).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
L & M Professional Consultants, Inc. v. Ferreira
(See City of Oakland v. Oakland Raiders (1982) 32 Cal.3d 60, 71-72 [ 183 Cal.Rptr. 673 , 646 P.2d 835 ]; Linggi v. Garovotti, supra, 45 Cal.2d at pp. 23-26; 2A Nichols on Eminent Domain, supra, § 7.5154.) “Once it is determined that the taking is for a public purpose, the fact that private persons may receive benefit is not sufficient to take away from the enterprise the characteristics of a public purpose. [Citations.]” (Rede velopment Agency v. Hayes (1954) 122 Cal.App.2d 777, 804 [ 266 P.2d 105 ], cert. den., 348 U.S. 897 [ 99 L.Ed. 705 , 75 S.Ct. 214 ]; see, e.g., County of Los Angele…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. $3,216.59 in United States Currency
See also, Rugendorf v. United States (1984) 376 U.S. 528, 531-532 , 84 S.Ct. 825 , 11 L.Ed.2d 887 , reh. den. 377 U.S. 940 , 84 S.Ct. 1330 , 12 L.Ed.2d 303 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stebbins
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 1081.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 18, 1964.
377 U.S. 940
Petitioner pro se., Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Douglas and Morton Hollander for the United States.
Cited by 9 opinions | Published
Motion to use other records denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Claims denied.