green
Positive treatment
Circuit Split
Quoted verbatim 1×
10.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1981 ·
…sentencing . . . was within the authority of no one but the trial judge.
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1981 ·
…sentencing ... was within the authority of no one but the trial judge.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 42 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Roma Construction v. Arusso
But see United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656, 662 (2d Cir.) (concluding city administrator who was city employee was not a public official even though he administered model cities program, for which the federal government provided 100% funding), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975).
examined
Cited "but see"
Roma Construction Company and Peter Zanni v. Ralph R. Arusso
(4×)
But see United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656, 662 (2d Cir.) (concluding city administrator who was city employee was not a public official even though he administered model cities program, for which the federal government provided 100% funding), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
cited
Cited "but see"
Mattel, Inc. v. United States
But see United States v. McCorkle, 511 F. 2d 482, 485 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975).
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Oscar Homero Ochoa and Ernest Garza Gonzalez
(2×)
But see United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 5 Cir., 507 F.2d 1213, 1223 , cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975). 4 .
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Robert Hamm, United States of America v. Willis Judge Butler, Les Wallick Fuller, Dayton Bud Evans, Jr. And Larry Dale Washington
(4×)
sentencing . . . was within the authority of no one but the trial judge.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Joseph E.
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 293 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S. Ct. 41 , 46 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Trade Commission v. Commerce Planet, Inc.
See Resort Car Rental Sys., Inc. v. FTC, 518 F.2d 962, 964 (9th Cir.) (“The Federal Trade Act is violated if [an advertisement] induces the first contact through deception, even if the buyer later becomes fully informed before entering the contract.”), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975). 2.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Humphries
(2×)
The trial court then set the case for an evidentiary hearing, after which the court apparently determined that, as a matter of law, Humphries was entrapped into committing the illegal activity. “ ‘ “Entrapment occurs when state officers or persons under their control in cite, induce, lure, or instígate a person into committing a criminal offense, which that person would not have otherwise committed, and had no intention of committing.” ’ Wright v. State, 494 So.2d 936, 938 (Ala.Cr.App.1986) (quoting Geckles v. State, 440 So.2d 1189, 1191 (Ala.Cr.App.1983)). ‘When a defendant raise…
cited
Cited "see"
Walley v. State
See United States v. Magana, 512 F.2d 1169 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Harris v. State
(2×)
"Once the defendant has carried this burden, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime charged." Lambeth , 562 So.2d at 578 ; See United States v. Gomez-Rojas , 507 F.2d 1213 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975). "`Such defense is not available, however, where the officer or other person acted in good faith for the purpose of discovering or detecting a crime and merely furnished the opportunity for the commission thereof by the one who had the criminal intent.'" Wright v. State , 494 So.2d …
discussed
Cited "see"
Roma Construction v. Arusso
See generally id. at _____________ ___ 2370 (endorsing the proposition that "[a]n act is done corruptly if it's done voluntarily and intentionally to bring about either an unlawful result or a lawful result by some unlawful method, with a hope or expectation of either financial gain or other benefit to oneself or a benefit of another person"); H.R. 748, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. 18 (1961) (reporting section 201 federal bribery statute) (stating that "[t]he word 'corruptly' which is also used in obstruction of justice statutes (18 U.S.C. 1503- 1505) means with wrongful or dishonest intent").
discussed
Cited "see"
Espinoza v. State
(2×)
See United States v. Magana, 512 F2d 1169, 1171 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U. S. 826 (1975). 4.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. George M. Bucuvalas, United States of America v. Aristedes C. Poravas, United States of America v. Arthur L. Venios, United States of America v. Bel-Art Realty, Inc.
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 293 (10th Cir.) (lack of direct observation of weapon not fatal to "probable cause" showing where "individuals [normally] keep weapons in their homes."), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975) 4 We recite some of the information in the affidavit.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bucuvalas
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 293 (10th Cir.) (lack of direct observation of weapon not fatal to “probable cause" showing where "individuals [normally] keep weapons in their homes."), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975). .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Phillip A. Parrish
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 293 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert B. Sutton, United States of America v. Mark A. Sucher
See United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482, 486-87 (7th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975) (applying the doctrine of “verbal completeness” prior to the passage of the Federal Rules of Evidence); VII J.
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated Jan. 2, 1985
(2×)
See United States v. Bello, 470 F.Supp. 723, 725 (S.D.Cal. 1979) (defendant not denied sixth amendment right to counsel by imposition of restraining order where court would allow court appointed counsel if defendant lacked the means to hire counsel other than through the use of tainted funds). [20] While the "sole or dominant purpose" rule is often invoked, see, e.g., United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656, 664 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); United States v. Fisher, 455 F.2d 1101, 1104-05 (2d Cir.1972); United States v. Dardi, 330 F.2d 316, 336 (2d…
cited
Cited "see"
Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission
See Resort Car Rental System,, Inc. v. F.T.C., 518 F.2d 962, 963 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert, denied, 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kaatz
See United States v. Robson, 9 Cir., 477 F.2d 13, 16 , cert. denied, 420 U.S. 927 , 95 S.Ct. 1125 , 43 L.Ed.2d 398 , and United States v. McCorkle, 7 Cir., 511 F.2d 482, 489 , cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Martorano
(2×)
See, United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1222 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975) (defendant entered government rented car and moved it; convictions of possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy affirmed).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gambini
See United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 477, 479 (7th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975).
cited
Cited "see"
Gerdes v. State
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 293 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
examined
Cited "see"
In Re Sealed Case
(4×)
Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855 , 86 S.Ct. 1840 , 16 L.Ed.2d 973 (1966); see United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656, 664 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hugo Marin and Virgilio Orlando Romero
See, *85 e.g., United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975). 6 In the present case, the completeness doctrine did not require admission of Romero’s entire statement.
cited
Cited "see"
Gaylord v. State
See United States v. Magana, 512 F. 2d 1169 (9th Cir.) cert. denied 423 U.S. 826 (1975); and State v. Nine, 315 So. 2d 667 (La. 1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. O'Neill Investigations, Inc.
See S.E.C. v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 202 , 67 S.Ct. 1575, 1580 , 91 L.Ed. 1995, 2002 (1946). [50] See also, Resort Car Rentals Sys., Inc. v. F.T.C., 518 F.2d 962, 964 (9th Cir.1975) cert. denied sub nom., MacKenzie v. U.S., 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); Thiret v. F.T.C., 512 F.2d 176, 180 (10th Cir.1975); Spiegel, Inc. v. F.T.C., 494 F.2d 59 (7th Cir.1974) cert. denied, 419 U.S. 896 , 95 S.Ct. 175 , 42 L.Ed.2d 140 (1974). [51] Floersheim v. F.T.C., 411 F.2d 874, 878 (9th Cir.1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1002 , 90 S.Ct. 551 , 24 L.Ed.2d 494 (1970). ("Deception itself…
discussed
Cited "see"
Mass v. Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc.
FTC v. National Lead Co., 352 U.S. 419, 428-29 , 77 S.Ct. 502 , 1 L.Ed.2d 438 (1957); Carter Products, Inc. v. FTC, 268 F.2d 461, 498 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 884 , 80 S.Ct. 155 , 4 L.Ed.2d 120 (1959); see Resort Car Rental System, Inc. v. FTC, 518 F.2d 962, 964 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Standard Oil Company of California v. Federal Trade Commission, Batten, Barton, Durstine & Osborn, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission
FTC v. National Lead Co., 352 U.S. 419, 428-29 , 77 S.Ct. 502 , 1 L.Ed.2d 438 (1957); Carter Products, Inc. v. FTC, 268 F.2d 461, 498 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 884 , 80 S.Ct. 155 , 4 L.Ed.2d 120 (1959); see Resort Car Rental System, Inc. v. FTC, 518 F.2d 962, 964 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Aloi
(2×)
See United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656, 663-64 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975). 28 .
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Farenga
Furthermore, though a private driveway leading to a home is not outside the area entitled to protection against unreasonable search and seizure (US Const, 4th Arndt; NY Const, art I, § 12; see United States v Magana, 512 F2d 1169, cert den 423 US 826 ; cf. People v Doerbecker, 39 NY2d 448, 452 ), the record in this case reveals that the driveway here was one in which the defendants’ activities were carried on in such an overt manner that the suppression court had a right to find that the investigator, in positioning himself there, had not invaded an area as to which defendants had a logical…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John Preston Rosenbarger, Jr.
See United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290 (10th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1976), (facts relied on for issuance of search warrant were nearly two years old; validity of warrant upheld); United States v. Barfield, 507 F.2d 53 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 950 , 95 S.Ct. 1684 , 44 L.Ed.2d 105 (1975), (40-day interval between observation of stolen property on defendant’s premises and issuance of warrant insufficient to invalidate the warrant).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth William Giles
(4×)
See United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1222 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Belisle v. State
See, e.g., United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Salinas v. United States
Compare United States v. Del Toro, 513 F. 2d 656, 661-662 (CA2), cert. denied, 423 U. S. 826 (1975), with United States v. Mosley, 659 F. 2d 812, 814-816 (CA7 1981), and United States v. Hinton, 683 F. 2d 195, 197-200 (CA7 1982), aff’d sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Schrein
(2×)
See, also, United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482 (7th Cir. 1975), cert. denied 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S. Ct. 43 , 46 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Yung
Based upon this information, the court finds that, at the time the warrant was issued, “the magistrate had a substantial basis for finding a fair probability that contraband or other evidence of a crime would be found in the place to be searched.” Cook, 949 F.2d at 292 ; see also United States v. Rahn, 511 F.2d 290, 292 (10th Cir.1975) (discussing timeliness of probable cause), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Federal Trade Commission v. Kitco of Nevada, Inc.
See, e.g., Resort Car Rental System, Inc. v. FTC, 518 F.2d 962, 964 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); The Raymond Lee Organization, 92 F.T.C. 489 , 619 (1978), aff'd, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir.1980). 3.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Allan Humphrey
(2×)
Compare, e.g., United States v. Wolffs, 594 F.2d 77, 80 (5th Cir. 1979) (“defendant must adduce some evidence, more than a scintilla, which tends to show government inducement and lack of predisposition”) with United States v. Timberlake, 559 F.2d 1375, 1379 (5th Cir. 1977) (must submit entrapment theory “for which there is any foundation in the evidence”) and with United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826, 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975) (defendant must present “a prima facie case of entrapment indicating that Government created a �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hoskins
(2×)
Compare U. S. v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656 (2d Cir.), cert. den. 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 *414 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975), and U. S. v. Loschiavo, 531 F.2d 659 (2d Cir. 1976). 8 The government argues that the City in fact was an entity acting for or on behalf of DOL, that IBES was something like a sub-agent of DOL, and that Mr. Hoskins, an IBES employee, was, therefore, working for or on behalf of DOL.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Thompson
See also United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1220 (5th Cir.), cert, denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975) (“[t]he law does-not require that a man be badged in order to be capable of entrapping an innocent citizen”); United States v. Buie, 407 F.2d 905, 908 (2d Cir.), affd sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dean Hill
(2×)
Compare, e. g., United States v. Wolffs, 594 F.2d 77, 80 (5th Cir. 1979) (“defendant must adduce some evidence, more than a scintilla, which tends to show government inducement and lack of predisposition”) with United States v. Timberlake, 559 F.2d 1375, 1379 (5th Cir. 1977) (must submit entrapment theory “for which there is any foundation in the evidence”) and with United States v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 41 , 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975) (defendant must present “a prima facie case of entrapment indicating that Government created a …
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. William R. Ojala
See also United States v. McCorkle, 511 F.2d 482, 485 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 , 96 S.Ct. 43 , 46 L.Ed.2d 43 (1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Merritt
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 74-1341.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 6, 1975.
Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (4)
C. A. 5th
Cir. Certiorari denied.