green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
18.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…n the case of a fatal accident, the same reasonable person would expect to answer more questions and to spend more time with those conducting the on-the-scene investigation.
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…reasonable person would usually be willing to tolerate more involvement with the police for a serious accident before concluding that he is in custody than he would for a minor accident. an investigation of a serious or fatal accident may be extensive without being criminal.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 17 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Antonio
(2×)
reasonable person would usually be willing to tolerate more involvement with the police for a serious accident before concluding that he is in custody than he would for a minor accident. an investigation of a serious or fatal accident may be extensive without being criminal.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Antonio
(2×)
reasonable person would usually be willing to tolerate more involvement with the police for a serious accident before concluding that he is in custody than he would for a minor accident. an investigation of a serious or fatal accident may be extensive without being criminal.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Curtis Blackwell and Billy Frank Richard, Sr., Defendants-Defendants
voss proffered generalized assertions of inaccuracy. but the record is barren of a specific objection on accuracy grounds
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Mark Turner
the commerce clause authorizes congress to punish any criminal activity bearing even a de minimis relation to interstate commerce.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mario Rosales-Garcia v. J.T. Holland, Warden, Reynero Arteaga Carballo v. Mark Luttrell, Warden Immigration and Naturalization Service
(2×)
See Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 984-85 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jerry Dale Lowe
(2×)
See United States v. Voss, 787 F.2d 393, 395 (8th Cir.) (statute broader than Sec. 33, which punishes anyone who commits arson on "property used in ... or ... affecting interstate or foreign commerce," held to require evidence "that the building [which was burned] was used in an activity affecting interstate commerce" rather than merely that the building owner was engaged in interstate commerce (emphasis added)), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 286 , 93 L.Ed.2d 261 (1986). 100 Furthermore, Sec. 33 requires that motor vehicles must be "used in" interstate commerce, not just "affect" inte…
discussed
Cited "see"
Animal Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. Mike Espy, in His Official Capacity as Secretary, United States Department of Agriculture
(2×)
See Clarke v. Securities Industry Ass’n, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 750 , 93 L.Ed.2d 757 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael Charles Beatty
(2×)
See United States v. Voss, 787 F.2d 393, 401-02 (8th Cir.) (standard of review for denial of a motion to continue is abuse of discretion), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 286 , 93 L.Ed.2d 261 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Cool Light Co., Inc. v. GTE Products Corp.
See Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 984 (1st Cir.) (explaining the law of the case doctrine), cert denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Charlton Memorial Hospital v. Foxboro Co.
The doctrine, however, is not an inflexible rule but rather “ ‘merely expresses the practices of courts generally to refuse to reopen what has been decided.’ ” Piazza v. Aponte Roque, 909 F.2d 35, 38 (1st Cir.1990) (citation omitted); accord Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 985 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986) (noting that law of the case doctrine is not absolute).
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
See Kennedy, 564 F.2d at 1339 . 43 We recently ruled in United States v. Stozek, 783 F.2d 891, 893 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1987), that the requisite intent to injure or defraud a bank "may be inferred from defendant's reckless disregard." Applying this principle to our case, the record shows that Hooper, at the very least, acted recklessly.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Graciani
See, e.g., United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1449 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 , 112 S.Ct. 441 , 116 L.Ed.2d 460 (1991); see also Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 985 (1st Cir.) (applying principle in habeas corpus context), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ralph Ramey, United States of America v. James \Bo\" Payne"
(2×)
See also United States v. Voss, 787 F.2d 393 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 286 , 93 L.Ed.2d 261 (1986) (finding, in dicta, connection to interstate commerce in a vacant residence owned by real estate business, being rehabilitated for resale, and insured by interstate carrier).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Forehand v. Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee
See, e.g., Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 784 F.2d 1546 (11th Cir.), 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 274 , 93 L.Ed.2d 250 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Alex Simmons
See, e.g., Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 983 (1st Cir.) ("Jury exposure to facts not admitted during trial violates the sixth amendment right to trial by jury by permitting evidence to reach the jury which has not been subjected to confrontation or cross-examination."), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986); Gibson v. Clanon, 633 F.2d 851, 854 (9th Cir.1980) ("[W]hen a jury considers facts that have not been introduced in evidence, a defendant has effectively lost the rights of confrontation, cross-examination, and the assistance of counsel with regard to jury con…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States of America, Ex Rel. Bessie I. Fleming v. Jane Huch, Warden, Dwight Correctional Center
See also United States v. Voss, 787 F.2d 393, 398 (8th Cir.) (faulty instructions that mislead the jury as to the elements of the charged crimes are not corrected, and the error cannot be treated as harmless, “merely because an appellate court, upon review, is satisfied that the jury would have found the essential facts had it been properly instructed”) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 286 , 93 L.Ed.2d 261 (1986), cited with approval in Falconer, 905 F.2d at 1137 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Simmons
See, e.g., Lacy v. Gardino, 791 F.2d 980, 983 (1st Cir.) (“Jury exposure to facts not admitted during trial violates the sixth amendment right to trial by jury by permitting evidence to reach the jury which has not been subjected to confrontation or cross-examination.”), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 888 , 107 S.Ct. 284 , 93 L.Ed.2d 259 (1986); Gibson v. Clanon, 633 F.2d 851, 854 (9th Cir.1980) (“[Wjhen a jury considers facts that have not been introduced in evidence, a defendant has effectively lost the rights of confrontation, cross-examination, and the assistance of counsel with regard to ju…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Roberts
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 86-5334.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 14, 1986.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (2)
C. A. 9th Cir.
Certiorari denied.