green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.6 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
"the propriety of joinder under Rule 8 is determined by the initial allegations of the indictment"
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 24 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Loren Michael Grey Bear, Tayron Dale Dunn, A/K/A Terry Dunn, Leonard George Fox and John Emmanuel Perez, A/K/A John Perez, United States of America v. Jesse Dean Cavanaugh, Paul Henry Cavanaugh, Maynard James Dunn, Timothy Sylvester Longie, Jr., Roger Darrel Charboneau, Dwayne Allen Charboneau, Richard John Lafuente, A/K/A Ricky Lafuente
the propriety of joinder under rule 8 is determined by the initial allegations of the indictment
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Grey Bear
But cf. United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1176-78 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 1034, 106 S.Ct. 277 , 599, 88 L.Ed.2d 241 , 578 (1985) ("the propriety of joinder under Rule 8 is determined by the initial allegations of the indictment”). .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Poston
See United States v. Lane, 474 US 438, 447 , 106 S Ct 725 , 88 L Ed 2d 814 (1986); United States v. Harrelson, 754 F2d 1153, 1176 (5th Cir), cert den, 474 US 908, 1034 (1985); United States v. Bledsoe, 674 F2d 647, 655 (8th Cir), cert den, 459 US 1040 (1982).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Blanco-Rodriguez
See United States v. Davis, 766 F.2d 1452, 1456 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Clinton Manges David Wayne Myers and Carl Hubert Shanklin
See United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1175 (5th Cir.1985) (denying one defendant's claim of prejudice based on her co-defendant's loathsome reputation as a hired killer), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. James J. \Buck\" Allemand
See United States v. Davis, 766 F.2d 1452, 1456 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 239 , 88 L.Ed.2d 240 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lou Angel John Dilliner Scott Malone v. Thomas L. Williams Sylvia A. Byrnes-Ales Donna Humphrey the City of Webb City, a Municipal Corporation
See United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1169 (5th Cir.) (holding that it was not objectively reasonable to expect no interception of a conversation that took place in jail), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 and 474 U.S. 1034 , 106 S.Ct. 599 , 88 L.Ed.2d 578 (1985); see also Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, S.Rep.
discussed
Cited "see"
Paul Kordenbrock v. Gene Scroggy, Warden, Kentucky State Penitentiary
(2×)
See United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1165 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985) (recusal not necessary absent specific conduct evidencing prejudice against defendant).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Juan Francisco Valdez
See United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1175 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Roy Wolf and Lorna Manlolo Wolf, A/K/A Lorna Manlolo McDevitt
See United States v. Davis, 766 F.2d 1452, 1458 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 239 , 88 L.Ed.2d 240 (1985). *1393 Defendant Roy Wolf argues in the alternative that the trial court erred in admitting certain statements against him under the coconspirator exception because those statements were not made “in furtherance” of the conspiracy, but rather were “mere narratives” and therefore inadmissible as beyond the scope of the coconspirator exception.
discussed
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES of America v. Betty JORDAN
(2×)
See United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Maine v. Donald F. Rutherford
If the defendant objects, the court must make a threshold determination whether “the State has introduced sufficient facts for the jury reasonably to conclude that the defendant adopted the admission of another.” Id.; see also State v. Marshall, 491 A.2d 554, 558 (Me.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Maine v. Donald F. Rutherford
If the defendant objects, the court must make a threshold determination whether “the State has introduced sufficient facts for the jury reasonably to conclude that the defendant adopted the admission of another.” Id.; see also State v. Marshall, 491 A.2d 554, 558 (Me.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James M. Lewis Debra Faye Lewis
United States v. Chagra, 807 F.2d 398, 402 (5th Cir.1986), ce rt. denied, 484 U.S. 832 , 108 S.Ct. 106 , 98 L.Ed.2d 66 (1987) (after rejecting the defendant’s argument that the jury instruction, which did not demand proof of an intent to kill but only demanded proof of reckless acts causing the death of another, was error, the court noted that the instruction reflected the correct definition of malice); see also, United States v. Harrelson, 766 F.2d 186 , 189 n. 5 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985); and United States v. McRae, 593 F.2d 700, 703 (5t…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Ex Rel. Collins v. Welborn
See also C Reply 62 (citing People v. Brisbon, 106 Ill.2d 342 , 88 Ill.Dec. 87 , 478 N.E.2d 402 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 276 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Mazzone
See, e.g., United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1168 (5th Cir.1985) (interpreting an identical federal wiretap provision, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (5), and requiring monitoring agents to minimize interception of privileged communications), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Smith
Id.; see also United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1169 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985); State v. Hussey, 469 So.2d 346, 351 (La.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Victor Arditti, United States of America v. Guillermo Avila
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1172 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gatto
See McQueeny, 779 F.2d at 923 (unfair prejudice is not simply testimony adverse to opponent); see also United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1179-80 (5th Cir.) (where witness did not positively identify defendant before she was hypnotized, but also did not fail to identify defendant before she was hypnotized, the testimony was beyond the exclusionary rule formulated in Valdez), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gatto
See McQueeny, 779 F.2d at 923 (unfair prejudice is not simply testimony adverse to opponent); see also United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1179-80 (5th Cir.) (where witness did not positively identify defendant before she was hypnotized, but also did not fail to identify defendant before she was hypnotized, the testimony was beyond the exclusionary rule formulated in Valdez), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Gacho
(2×)
We are persuaded that regardless of what the evidence showed, he would have voted against the imposition of the death penalty, and we conclude that the circuit court did not err in excusing him.” ( 105 Ill. 2d 414, 431 ; see also People v. Brisbon (1985), 106 Ill. 2d 342, 357-60 , cert. denied (1985), 474 U.S. 908 , 88 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Rupe
(2×)
"By injecting the parole consideration into the penalty determination, the jury is diverting its attention from the offense and the offender, and is focusing upon a speculative possibility that may or may not occur." Walker , at 515; see also People v. Brisbon, 106 Ill. 2d 342, 367-68 , 478 N.E.2d 402 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Billy L. Massey and Larry P. Wages
See also United States v. Harrelson, 754 F.2d 1153, 1174 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 , 106 S.Ct. 277 , 88 L.Ed.2d 241 (1985); United States v. Beil, 577 F.2d 1313 (5th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 946 , 99 S.Ct. 1422 , 59 L.Ed.2d 634 *1002 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JAMES M. LEWIS; DEBRA FAYE LEWIS
United States v. Chagra, 807 F.2d 398, 402 (5th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 832 (1987) (after rejecting the defendant’s argument that the jury instruction, which did not demand proof of an intent to kill but only demanded proof of reckless acts causing the death of another, was error, the court noted that the instruction reflected the correct definition of malice); see also, Unites States v. Harrelson, 766 F.2d 186 , 189 n.5 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 908 (1985); and United States v. McRae, 593 F.2d 700, 703 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 862 (1979).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brown
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 85-5357.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 15, 1985.
Published
Citer courts: Eighth Circuit (1)
Ct. App. D. C. Certiorari denied.