green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
9.1 score
“defendant's bruton rights violated ..: only if the statement, standing alone, would clearly inculpate him without introduction of further independent evidence”
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 39 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
McCoy v. State
(2×)
But see Allen v. State, 281 Ark. 1 , 660 S.W.2d 922 (1983), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985); and Foster v. State, 275 Ark. 427 , 631 S.W.2d 7 (1982) (disregarding two of the three statutory tests and holding that an offense was not a lesser-included offense because it required proof beyond those elements required to commit the greater offense).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Michael Allan Durosko v. Samuel A. Lewis Arizona Attorney General
But cf. Baker v. Duckworth, 752 F.2d 302 (7th Cir.) cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 618 (1985) (distinguishing Bullington and finding that after a jury found that the defendant was not a habitual offender in an enhancement proceeding relating to one theft, the prosecutor could use the same two prior felony convictions plus a third as the basis for a habitual offender enhancement relating to a different theft charge).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Leonard
defendant's bruton rights violated ..: only if the statement, standing alone, would clearly inculpate him without introduction of further independent evidence
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Ruiz
we also reject the claim that reading the april transcript to the july grand jury rather than presenting in person infects the indictment.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Fortenberry v. State
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
multiple hearsay or hearsay upon hearsay is permissible in establishing probable cause
cited
Cited "see"
Williams v. State
See Waldrop v. State , 462 So.2d 1021 (Ala.Crim.App. 1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985); Reynolds v. State , 396 So.2d 1076 (Ala.Crim.App. 1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Cynthia M. Stoner
(2×)
See United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1432 (2d Cir.) (holding that a Yates issue is subject to waiver), ce rt. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Frank Locascio, and John Gotti
Although a “plain” error or defect affecting substantial rights of a party may warrant reversal of the conviction even though no objection was made in the trial court, see Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(b), the plain-error standard warrants reversal “solely in those circumstances in which a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result.” United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152 , 163 n. 14, 102 S.Ct. 1584 , 1592 n. 14, 71 L.Ed.2d 816 (1982); see United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1432 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Brooke v. Duckworth
See Baker v. Duckworth, 752 F.2d 302 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 618 (1985), and Denton v. Duckworth, 873 F.2d 144 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 941 , 110 S.Ct. 341 , 107 L.Ed.2d 330 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Federico Giovanelli, Steven Maltese, and Carmine Gualtiere
(2×)
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); see also United States v. Maldonado-Rivera, 922 F.2d 934, 956 (2d Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ---, 111 S.Ct. 2858 , 115 L.Ed.2d 1025 (1991). 43 Additionally, it bears noting that a simple solution existed to the dilemma confronting the district judge.
cited
Cited "see"
Golden v. State
Accord, Baker v. Duckworth (7th Cir.1985), 752 F.2d 302 , cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 618 (1985) (interpreting IND.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Villegas
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Villegas
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Casamento
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), ce rt. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); see also Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Casamento
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); United States v. Cunningham, 723 F.2d 217, 230 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 951 , 104 S.Ct. 2154 , 80 L.Ed.2d 540 (1984); see also Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tackett v. State
(2×)
See Allen v. State, 281 Ark. 1 , 660 S.W.2d 922 (1983), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gallo
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Gallo
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States Football League v. National Football League
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1180 (2d Cir.1984) (door may be opened through counsel’s opening statement), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Football League v. National Football League
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1180 (2d Cir.1984) (door may be opened through counsel's opening statement), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985). 193 Judge Leisure correctly circumscribed the uses to which the evidence of a merger strategy was put and gave a limiting instruction to the jury four times.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Murad Nersesian
(2×)
See United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1433 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael Jerome Sumpter
See United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985). 53 We first address defendant's request for the transcript of Burke's testimony from the Wilkinson trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Turoff
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1177 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); United States v. Standard Drywall Corp., 617 F.Supp. 1283, 1297 (E.D.N.Y.1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James A. Gantzer
See United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1178 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); United States v. Robinson, 560 F.2d 507, 514 (2d Cir.1977) (in banc), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 905 , 98 S.Ct. 1451 , 55 L.Ed.2d 496 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Soto v. Lefevre
See United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1436 (2d Cir.1985), cert. denied 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (citing United States v. MacDonald, 688 F.2d 224, 232-33 ) (declaration against penal interest implicating third person not admissible where there is insufficient corroboration of third party's involvement); United States v. Katsougrakis, 715 F.2d 769, 777-78 (2d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1040 , 104 S.Ct. 704 , 79 L.Ed.2d 169 (1984) (declaration against penal interest exception to the hearsay rule may be used to admit hearsay declarations inculpatory of third …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. O'Connor
See generally United States v. Wilson, 11 F.3d 346, 354 (2d Cir.1993), cert, denied, 511 U.S. 1025 , 114 S.Ct. 1415 , 128 L.Ed.2d 86 (1994); United States v. Taylor, 562 F.2d 1345, 1362-63 (2d Cir.), cert, denied, 432 U.S. 909 , 97 S.Ct. 2958 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1083 (1977); see also United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1177 (2d Cir.1984) (“Bari ”) (the fact that the defendant had not pleaded guilty “indicated that he was] unlikely to waive the privilege against self-incrimination at a separate trial unless [he] had already been acquitted”), cert, denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Powell v. State
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1180 (2nd Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985) (within trial court’s discretion to admit extraneous offense evidence to rebut defen sive theory raised in defendant’s opening statement); United States v. Price, 617 F.2d 455, 459-60 (7th Cir.1979) (extraneous offense evidence admissible in part to rebut defensive theory raised in opening statement); United States v. Olsen, 589 F.2d 351, 352 (8th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 917 , 99 S.Ct. 1237 , 59 L.Ed.2d 468 (1979) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Vardiman
(2×)
See e.g, Baker v. Duckworth, 752 F.2d 302, 304 (7th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 618 (1985) (Indiana's habitual offender statute "does not create a separate crime....
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Malik Ward
See also United States v. Jenkins, 904 F.2d 549, 553 (10th Cir.), (buyer-seller relationship does not establish organizer or supervisor status), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 962 , 111 S.Ct. 395 , 112 L.Ed.2d 404 (1990). “[T]he terms organizer, supervisor, or manager are to be given their ordinary meaning.” United States v. Moya-Gomez, 860 F.2d 706, 746 (7th Cir.1988) (citing United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1431 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985)), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 908 , 109 S.Ct. 3221 , 106 L.Ed.2d 571 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Alan E. Harwood, Also Known as Expresso, and Frederick W. McKee
See, e.g., United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1436 (2d Cir.) (affirming district court refusal to allow, a private investigator to testify about a statement made by defendant-1 that defendanh-2 did not know that defendants, was selling drugs out of defendanh-2's store), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Tutino
See also, United States v. Jamil, 707 F.2d 638, 642 (2d Cir.1983) (trial court's evidentiary rulings will not be overturned absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion). 93 The district court's exercise of its discretion is guided by Fed.R.Evid. 611, which instructs the trial court to supervise the "mode ... of interrogating witnesses" so as to make the presentation effective for "the ascertainment of the truth" and "to avoid needless consumption of time." To achieve those goals and to administer justice efficiently and effectively, the district court is vested with "broad discretion over th…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morrison v. State
Compare Waldrop v. State , 424 So.2d 1345 , 1347-49 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982), after remand, 462 So.2d 1021 (Ala.Cr.App. 1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 618 (1985), requiring a recusal where the prosecutor testified at trial to a confession the accused made to him.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gabriel Alvarez, Gustavo Holguin, Leovigilda Rivera, Humberto Olivares Castrellon and Oneyda Zambrana
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1432 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985); United States v. Young, 745 F.2d 733, 755 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied 470 U.S. 1084 , 105 S.Ct. 1842 , 85 L.Ed.2d 142 (1985); United States v. Natelli, 527 F.2d 311, 329 (2d Cir.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 934 , 96 S.Ct. 1663 , 48 L.Ed.2d 175 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Marilyn Ortiz
(2×)
See also United States v. Wilkinson, 754 F.2d 1427, 1435 (2d Cir.) (appellate review of statements made in prosecution's summation limited to statements to which objection is made), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tyrone C. Cooper v. James A. Youngblood, Individually and in His Official Capacity Attorney General of South Carolina
There would be no jurisdiction in this case to review a final order of the South Carolina Supreme Court denying Cooper in forma pauperis status. * See id. at 485 ; see also Ganey v. Barefoot, 749 F.2d 1124 (4th Cir.1984) (district court lacked jurisdiction to decide constitutionality of North Carolina statute requiring appellant in civil case to procure attorney certification before being permitted to proceed in forma pauperis), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985). 3 Therefore, we grant a certificate of probable cause and affirm the district court judgment dismissing the case for lack of jurisd…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
William H. Glazebrook v. Harry L. Carrico
See also Ganey v. Barefoot, 749 F.2d 1124, 1127 (4th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985). 4 Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal of the action.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
James E.M. Spencer v. Jessie L. Spencer, Mildred Hassell, Nathan T. Everett, Mitchell Norton, Judge Hardison
See also Ganey v. Barefoot, 749 F.2d 1124, 1127 (4th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 (1985). 2 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment below.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hamid
(2×)
See also Williams v. United States, 470 A.2d 302, 308 (D.C.1983), vacated, 470 A.2d 312 (1984), on rehearing en banc, 485 A.2d 950 (D.C.), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3483 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985) ("it appears to have been standard Superior Court practice for lawyers to file Rule 35 motions toward the end of the 120-day period, and forjudges to rule on these motions after the 120-day period had closed_ At the time appellant's counsel filed his Rule 35 motion, every federal court that had decided the question had construed the 120-day limit as a filing deadline.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Vetere
Finally, under the proper circumstances, it is appropriate to dismiss the indictment, even (as was the case in Hogan) if a petit jury has already returned a conviction on the charges in the indictment. 712 F.2d at 757 ; see also United States v. Bari, 750 F.2d 1169, 1176 (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1019 , 105 S.Ct. 3482 , 87 L.Ed.2d 617 (1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rusniaczek
v.
United Air Lines
v.
United Air Lines
No. 84-6613.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 17, 1985.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.