green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.9 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 24 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Ronald Lyles, Jesse Johnson, Carlos Holder and Benjamin Dunham, Defendants
premature motions to sever not diligently pursued as the prejudicial evidence unfolds cannot serve as insurance against an adverse verdict.
discussed
Cited "see"
Stellacom, Inc. v. United States
See Boston Edison v. Federal Power Comm’n, 557 F.2d 845, 848-49 (D.C.Cir.) cert. denied 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 482 , 54 L.Ed.2d 314 (1977); National Retired Teachers Ass’n v. United States Postal Serv., 430 F.Supp. 141, 148 (D.C.D.C.), aff'd, 593 F.2d 1360 (D.C.Cir.1977).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Robert Steven Lujan
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 965 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
23 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 893, 26 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 860 United States of America v. Carol G. Unruh, William L. Fowler, Robert Hopper, Stephen C. Forde, Defendants
(2×)
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 967 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Joseph Charles Bonanno, Jr.
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 964 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Unruh
(2×)
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 967 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Knutson v. State
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 965-66 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, sub nom Dolwig v. U.S., 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977). 2 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Triton Oil and Gas Corporation
See Shell Oil Co. v. FERC, 664 F.2d 79, 83 (5th Cir.1981) (“FERC’s exercising its equitable discretion for the sake of exercise or simply because it possesses equitable discretion is insufficient justification for departing from the application of its general regulations.”). 8 “Although an administrative agency is not bound to rigid adherence to its precedents, it is equally essential that when it decides to reverse its course, it must give notice that the standard is being changed, ... and apply the changed standard only to those actions taken by parties after the new standard has bee…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael O'connor, United States of America v. Mario Leon Espinosa-Velez, United States of America v. Luis Eduardo Castaneda, United States of America v. Jose Libardo Castano-Medina
Because no limiting instruction was given, however, the jury was free to use the statements to prove the matters asserted 6 We test this and subsequent violations of 801(d)(2)(E) under the harmless error standard applicable to constitutional errors, see Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824, 828 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1969), thus obviating the need to apply a confrontation clause analysis 7 Although the declaration was evidence of prior bad acts, Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) would not have barred its use against Castaneda because in a narcotics trial evidence of prior narcotics transactions i…
discussed
Cited "see"
Fernandez v. United States
See Silverman v. United States, 556 F.2d 655, 659 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 484 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977); United States v. Malcolm, 432 F.2d 809, 812 (2d Cir.1970) (and cases cited therein).
discussed
Cited "see"
New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
See Boston Edison Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 557 F.2d 845, 848-49 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 482 , 54 L.Ed.2d 314 (1977) (when administrative agency reverses course from its precedents, it must give notice that standard is being changed).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lutz
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 967 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jerome P. Lutz, United States of America v. Jack D. Stewart, United States of America v. Perry A. White, United States of America v. Larry Zitek
See United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 967 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977). 27 The district court instructed the jury at the close of trial to give separate consideration to each defendant.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Clarence Earl Jones
We must affirm the jury’s verdict if “the evidence, considered most favorably to the government, was such as to permit a rational conclusion by the jury that the accused was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Nelson, 419 F.2d at 1242 ; see United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 963 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977); Robinson, 546 F.2d at 314 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James H. Cain, Jr.
See, e.g., Atkinson v. United States, 344 F.2d 97, 99-100 (8th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 867 (1965), and Morris v. United States, 7 F.2d 785, 792-93 (8th Cir. 1925), cert. denied, 270 U.S. 640 (1926); see also United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 963-64 (9th Cir. 1977) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 (1977), and United States v. Hartenfeld, 113 F.2d 359, 361-62 (7th Cir. 1940), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 647 (1940).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James Hubert Cain, Jr.
See, e.g., Atkinson v. United States, 344 F.2d 97, 99-100 (8th Cir.1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 867 , 86 S.Ct. 141 , 15 L.Ed.2d 106 (1965), and Morris v. United States, 7 F.2d 785, 792-93 (8th Cir.1925), cert. denied, 270 U.S. 640 , 46 S.Ct. 205 , 70 L.Ed. 775 (1926); see also United States v. *1252 Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 963-64 (9th Cir.1977) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977), and United States v. Hartenfeld, 113 F.2d 359, 361-62 (7th Cir.1940), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 647 , 61 S.Ct. 30 , 85 L.Ed. 413 (1940).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James H. Cain, Jr.
See, e.g., Atkinson v. United States, 344 F.2d 97, 99-100 (8th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 867 (1965), and Morris v. United States, 7 F.2d 785, 792-93 (8th Cir. 1925), cert. denied, 270 U.S. 640 (1926); see also United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 963-64 (9th Cir. 1977) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 (1977), and United States v. Hartenfeld, 113 F.2d 359, 361-62 (7th Cir. 1940), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 647 (1940).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Carl Raymond Burgess
See also United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 966 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977) [diligent pursuit of a severance motion is the guiding principle]; and Williamson v. United States, 310 F.2d 192, 197 (9th Cir.1962) [failure to renew request for severance at close of evidence suggests that prejudice now asserted to have resulted from the joinder may not have seemed so substantial to appellant in the context of trial].
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Charles Eugene Monks, United States of America v. Gary A. Holt
His failure to do so at least suggests that the prejudice now asserted to have resulted from the joinder may not have seemed so substantial to appellant in the context of trial____ Williamson v. United States, 310 F.2d 192, 197 (9th Cir.1962) (footnotes omitted); see also United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958, 966 (9th Cir.) (per curiam) (“Premature motions to sever not diligently pursued as the prejudicial evidence unfolds cannot serve as insurance against an adverse verdict.”), cer t. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Eastern Carolinas Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See, e.g., Boston Edison Co. v. FPC, 557 F.2d 845, 859 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 482 , 54 L.Ed.2d 314 (1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Eastern Carolinas Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See, e.g., Boston Edison Co. v. FPC, 557 F.2d 845, 859 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 482 , 54 L.Ed.2d 314 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lawson
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Rucker, 586 F.2d 899, 902 (2d Cir.1978) (“The fact that evidence may be admissible against one defendant but not against others does not require separate trials.”); see also United States v. Kaplan, 554 F.2d 958 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 483 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Marcus T. Baumann v. United States
(2×)
See also Silverman v. United States, 556 F.2d 655 (2d Cir.) (by implication), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 484 , 54 L.Ed.2d 315 (1977); Morgan v. United States, 438 F.2d 291 (5th Cir. 1971). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
1880 Columbia Road, N. W., Tenants' Ass'n v. District of Columbia Rental Accommodations Commission
Davis, Administrative Law Treatise, § 5.08, at 341 (1958); see also Boston Edison Co. v. F. P. C., 181 U.S.App.D.C. 222 , 557 F.2d 845 , cert. denied, Towns of Norwood, Concord and Wellesley, Mass. v. Boston Edison Co., 434 U.S. 956 , 98 S.Ct. 482 , 54 L.Ed.2d 314 (1977).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Chapman
v.
Michigan
v.
Michigan
No. 77-467.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 14, 1977.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Second Circuit (1)
Ct. App. Mich. Certiorari denied.