green
Positive treatment
4.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Richard Gerry Drinkard v. Gary L. Johnson, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
(2×)
See Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 189 (Tex.Cr.App.1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2915 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1988) (“In Texas, voluntary intoxication is no defense to the commission of a criminal wrong.
cited
Cited "see"
Broussard v. State
See Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 183 (Tex.Crim.App.1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2915 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1987).
cited
Cited "see"
Hathorn v. State
See Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 184-185 (Tex.Crim.App.1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2915 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. David Stanley Mack
See United States v. Thornberg, 844 F.2d 573, 575 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 (1988). 4 The in-court identification of Mr. Mack was stricken from the record and not referred to again by the government throughout the remainder of the trial.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Martin F. Hogan
See United States v. Garner, 837 F.2d 1404, 1412 (7th Cir.1987), ce rt. denied, — U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 2022 , 100 L.Ed.2d 608 , -U.S. —-, 108 S.Ct. 2914 , 101 L.Ed.2d 945 , — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 244 , 102 L.Ed.2d 232 (1988); see also United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 447 , 106 S.Ct. 725, 731 , 88 L.Ed.2d 814 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
RICHARD GERRY DRINKARD v. GARY L. JOHNSON, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
See Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 189 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 (1988) ("In Texas, voluntary intoxication is no defense to the commission 26 The relevant sentence in the instruction reads, "Therefore, if you find that the defendant . . . was temporarily insane as a result of intoxication, then you may take such condition into consideration . . . ." The grammatical definition of an antecedent is "a word, phrase, or clause, usually a substantive, that is replaced by a pronoun usually at a later point." RANDOM HOUSE COLLEGE DICTIONARY 56 (1980) (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Safe Chain Solutions, LLC
“Even a carefully crafted protective order is deemed insufficient to adequately protect an unwilling witness in a civil action from answering questions that could potentially incriminate him.” Andover Data Servs., a Div. of Players Computer, Inc. v. Stat. Tabulating Corp., 876 F.2d 1080, 1084 (2d Cir. 1989); see also In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468, 1478 (4th Cir. 1988) (“Uncertainty about the ultimate outcome of a protective order will mean that no deponent may always effectively rely on a protective order to secure his right against self-incrimination.”), cert. denied, 487 U…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
King v. Olympic Pipeline Co.
(2×)
Compare In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468 (4th Cir. 1988) (adopting per se precedence of grand jury subpoena over protective order), cert. den., 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2914 , 101 L.Ed.2d 945 (1988) and In re Grand Jury Proceedings v. United States, 995 F.2d 1013 (11th Cir.1993) (adopting Fourth Circuit's per se rule) with In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 945 F.2d 1221 (2d Cir.1991) (rejecting per se supremacy of grand jury subpoena over protective order) with In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 138 F.3d 442 (1st Cir.1998) (adopting "modified per se rule"), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 939 , 118 S.Ct. 234…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
King v. Olympic Pipe Line Co.
Compare In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468 (4th Cir.) (adopting per se precedence of grand jury subpoena over protective order), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 (1988) and In re Grand Jury Proceedings v. United States, 995 F.2d 1013 (11th Cir. 1993) (adopting Fourth Circuit’s per se rule) with In re Grand Jury Subpoena v. Doe, 945 F.2d 1221 (2d Cir. 1991) (rejecting per se supremacy of grand jury subpoena over protective order) with In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 138 F.3d 442 (1st Cir.) (adopting “modified per se rule”), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 939 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State Ex Rel. Wright v. Stucky
(2×)
See, e.g., In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468 (4th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2914 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1988), where the court held that the issuance of a Rule 26 protective order in a civil proceeding is not grounds to quash a grand jury subpoena for the deposition transcript. 6 In a statement that is particularly pertinent to the instant case, the Fourth Circuit in In re Grand Jury Subpoena said: In contrast with a grant of immunity, the government may not use a protective order to compel a witness to testify during a criminal or civil proceeding.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ramirez v. State
(2×)
Id.; see also Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 190 (Tex.Crim.App.1987), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2915 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1988)(evidence that defendant was "crazy drunk" insufficient to show temporary insanity); Still v. State, 709 S.W.2d 658, 661 (Tex.Crim.App.1986)(evidence that defendant "lost his head" insufficient to show temporary insanity).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ransom v. State
See also Cordova v. State, 733 S.W.2d 175, 189-190 (Tex.Cr.App.1987) cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2915 , 101 L.Ed.2d 946 (1988); Johnson v. State, 691 S.W.2d 619, 625-626 (Tex.Cr.App.1984) cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 , 106 S.Ct. 184 , 88 L.Ed.2d 152 (1985); Stewart v. State, 686 S.W.2d 118, 121 (Tex.Cr.App.1984) cert. denied, 474 U.S. 866 , 106 S.Ct. 190 , 88 L.Ed.2d 159 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Certain Real Property & Premises Known as 1344 Ridge Road
(2×)
See, e.g., In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468 , 1472 n. 6 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 487 U.S. 1240 , 108 S.Ct. 2914 , 101 L.Ed.2d 945 (1988); United States v. Renda, 669 F.Supp. 1544 (D.Kan.1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Oshatz
Compare In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 836 F.2d 1468 (4th Cir.) (criminal subpoena enforceable despite protective *702 order), cert. denied sub nom., — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 2914 , 101 L.Ed.2d 945 (1988) with Martindell v. International Tel. and Tel.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dugger, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections
v.
Foster
v.
Foster
No. 87-1701.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 30, 1988.
Published
Sup. Ct. Fla. Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari denied.