green
Positive treatment
3.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1971
1998
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Albert Duro v. Edward Reina, Chief of Police, Salt River Department of Public Safety, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
(2×)
See United States v. Burland, 441 F.2d 1199, 1203 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 137 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971).
cited
Cited "see"
Multi-State Communications, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Rko General, Inc., Intervenor
See Boyden v. Commissioner of Patents, 441 F.2d 1041 , 1043 n. 3 (D.C.Cir.) (“ ‘[s]hall’ is the language of command”), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 139 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Smith John and Harry Smith John
See United States v. Burland, 9 Cir. 1971, 441 F.2d 1199 , cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 137 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971) (Indian convicted of passing forged checks to non-Indians within Indian country); United States v. Sosseur, 7 Cir. 1950, 181 F.2d 873 (Indian convicted of operating slot machines on an Indian reservation in violation of Wisconsin law which was operative by virtue of 18 U.S.C. § 1152 and the Assimilative Crimes Act). 7 In Sosseur the Seventh Circuit concluded: We think it is clear that unless there is present one of the three conditions provided by § 1152 K 2 to exempt a…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The City of Piqua, Ohio v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Dayton Power and Light Company, Intervenor
Compare Buckley v. Valeo, 171 U.S.App.D.C. 172, 174 , 519 F.2d 821 , 893 n.191 (1975) (use of “shall” can either be mandatory or directory, depending on its context and legislative intent), aff’d in part and rev’d In part, 424 U.S. 1 , 96 S.Ct. 612 , 46 L.Ed.2d 659 (1976), with Boyden v. Commissioner of Patents, 142 U.S.App.D.C. 351 , 353 n.3, 441 F.2d 1041 , 1043 n.3 (Cir.) (“shall” is the language of command), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 139 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971). 8 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michael Douglas Wiggins
See, e. g., United States v. Pittman, 439 F.2d 906 , 909 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 138 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971); Nelson v. United States, 415 F.2d 483, 487 (5th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1060 , 90 S.Ct. 751 , 24 L.Ed.2d 754 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fox v. Bureau of Revenue
(2×)
See also United States v. Burland, 441 F2d 1199 (9th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 842 , 92 S.Ct. 137 , 30 L.Ed.2d 77 (1971), where it was held that a federal court had exclusive jurisdiction over an Indian belonging to a tribe that had ceded jurisdiction to the state under 25 U.S.C. § 1322 (a) because his alleged crime was committed on a reservation that had not so ceded jurisdiction, and Cook v. State, -S.D.-, 215 N.W.2d 832 (1974), where it was held that state courts lacked jurisdiction to convict an Indian belonging to a California tribe who allegedly committed a crime on a South Dak…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cannon
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 70-5261.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 12, 1971.
Published
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.