green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
9.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1995 ·
…because the secretary's motion was not filed until thirteen days after entry of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the district court correctly denied relief on jurisdictional grounds.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 26 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Andre Jones v. Thomas F. Page, Warden, Menard Correctional Center, and James Ryan, Attorney General of the State of Illinois
reaching the prejudice issue first will often obviate the need to rule definitively on the more difficult performance question
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Brumark Corp. v. Samson Resources Corp.
because the secretary's motion was not filed until thirteen days after entry of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the district court correctly denied relief on jurisdictional grounds.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Brumark Corporation v. Samson Resources Corporation
because the secretary's motion was not filed until thirteen days after entry of the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the district court correctly denied relief on jurisdictional grounds.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Charles W. Anshen
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
There is no reason "to depart from the traditional rule that a defendant must point to specific errors or omissions which prejudiced his defense, because if a ... defect indeed has some impact on the attorney's professional judgment it should be manifested in his courtroom behavior and conduct of the trial." Id. at 876. 13 We AFFIRM the district court's denial of the motions for a mistrial and for a new trial. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3
cited
Cited "see"
Hentz v. State
See United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. James
See People v. Caruso, 119 Ill. 2d 376 , 519 N.E.2d 440 (1987), cert. denied 488 U.S. 829 (1988) (An omission to perform a duty forms the foundation or essence of an offense if to perform the offense requires the accused to fail to perform his or her affirmative duty as imposed by the law of this State.).
cited
Cited "see"
Rubinstein v. Administrators of Tulane
See Urrutia v. Valero Energy Corp., 841 F.2d 123, 125 (5th Cir.), cert, denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988). 7 .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Archuleta
See State v. Bowman, 741 S.W.2d 10, 13-14 (Mo. banc 1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 60 (1988) (upholding conviction which was based on prior inconsistent statements where evidence existed to corroborate statements).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mary Parker v. Board of Public Utilities of Kansas City, Kansas
Co., 996 F.2d 1111, 1113-14 (11th Cir.1993); Flint v. Howard, 464 F.2d 1084, 1087 (1st Cir.1972); Sonnenblick-Goldman Corp. v. Nowalk, 420 F.2d 858, 860 (3d Cir.1970); see Brock v. Citizens Bank of Clovis, 841 F.2d 344, 348 (10th Cir.) (affirming, without discussion of Rule 6(e), district court’s denial of relief on jurisdictional grounds when Rule 59(e) motion was filed thirteen days after entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Mozo
See United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Willoughby
(2×)
Sullivan v. Patterson, 64 Ariz. 40, 47 , 165 P.2d 309, 313 (1946) ("[I]t is the right of trial by an impartial jury in the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed that is preserved rather than the absolute right to a trial in the county.") (emphasis added); State v. Mohr, 150 Ariz. 564, 566 , 724 P.2d 1233, 1235 (App. 1986); accord People v. Caruso, 119 Ill.2d 376 , 116 Ill.Dec. 548, 554 , 519 N.E.2d 440, 446 (1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stern v. Shalala
Courts enforce what “the defendant reasonably understood” the plea agreement to mean when the guilty plea was entered, United States v. Corsentino, 685 F.2d 48, 51 (2d Cir.1982); accord, e.g., United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519, 1521 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); In re Arnett, 804 F.2d 1200, 1203 (11th Cir.1986); United States v. Crusco, 536 F.2d 21, 27 (3d Cir.1976); Johnson v. Beto, 466 F.2d 478, 480 (5th Cir.1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Stern v. Shalala
Ultimately, the amount of the losses, as determined in the administrative proceedings, was $70,648, the amount of assessments sought by the IG. 11 Courts enforce what "the defendant reasonably understood" the plea agreement to mean when the guilty plea was entered, United States v. Corsentino, 685 F.2d 48, 51 (2d Cir.1982); accord, e.g., United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519, 1521 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); In re Arnett, 804 F.2d 1200, 1203 (11th Cir.1986); United States v. Crusco, 536 F.2d 21, 27 (3d Cir.1976); Johnson v. Beto, 466 F.2d 47…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Aussie
See People v. Caruso, 119 Ill.2d 376 , 116 Ill.Dec. 548, 553 , 519 N.E.2d 440, 445 (1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988); Trindle v. State, 326 Md. 25 , 602 A.2d 1232, 1235-1237 (1992); People v. Harvey, 174 Mich.App. 58 , 435 N.W.2d 456, 457 (1989); Roberts v. State, 619 S.W.2d 161, 164 (Tex.Crim.App.1981); Rios v. State, 733 P.2d 242, 250 (Wyo.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 833 , 108 S.Ct. 108 , 98 L.Ed.2d 68 (1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Anthony Dwayne Anderson
See United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519, 1522 (11th Cir.) (Parole Commission could consider the information provided by the government even if that information was improperly included in the PSR), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 *607 S.Ct. 82, 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); Levesque v. Brennan, 864 F.2d 515, 518 (7th Cir.1988) (same); Ochoa v. United States, 819 F.2d 366, 372 (2d Cir.1987) (same); Sheppard v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 738 F.Supp. 888, 890 (M.D.
cited
Cited "see"
Stephen L. Feliciana v. United States
See Smith v. Ylst, 826 F.2d 872, 876 (9th Cir.1987) (mental illness of attorney not per se ineffective assistance), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cook v. Lee College
See Washington v. Patlis, 868 F.2d 172, 175 (5th Cir.1989), and Urrutia v. Valero Energy Corp., 841 F.2d 123, 125 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988), in which the Fifth Circuit has found that the EEOC’s routine transmission of charges filed with it to the TCHR under a worksharing agreement instituted the state proceedings required by Title VII’s § 706(e). 14 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Bonin v. Vasquez
See Smith v. Ylst, 826 F.2d 872, 876 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988) (“Rather than attempt to identify mental illnesses that would presumptively disable an attorney from conducting a criminal defense we believe it is more prudent to evaluate the attorney’s actual conduct of a trial in light of allegations of mental incompetence.”) (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited "see"
Willette v. Finn
See Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting v. Sotheby Parke Bernet, Inc., 839 F.2d 780, 782 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); McCormick on Evidence § 12, at 31 (E.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jimmy Lee Jefferies, Betty J. Jefferies
See Tobon-Hernandez, 845 F.2d at 281 (remanding for specific performance), United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519, 1525 (11th Cir.) (same), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 829 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); Arnett, 804 F.2d at 1204 (granting writ of mandamus and ordering specific performance).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thompson v. State
See State v. Mozo, 655 So.2d 1115, 1117 (Fla.1995) (holding that interception of an electronic communication occurs where the communication originates); see also United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Abbott v. Village of Winthrop Harbor
See, e.g., United States v. Nelson, 837 F.2d 1519 , 1527 *938 (11th Cir.) (“[T]he term ‘intercept’ as it relates to ‘aural acquisitions’ refers to the place where a communication is initially obtained regardless of where the communication is ultimately heard.”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 82 , 102 L.Ed.2d 58 (1988); United States v. Turk, 526 F.2d 654, 659 (5th Cir.1976) (“[W]e conclude that no new and distinct interception occurs when the contents of a communication are revealed through the replaying of a previous recording.”), ce rt. denied, 429 U.S. 823 , 97 S.Ct…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re State Police Litigation
See United States v. Turk, 526 F.2d 654, 658 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 828 , 97 S.Ct. 74 , 50 L.Ed.2d 84 (1976). 35 Thus while the Act does not precisely define what an interception is, it must be deemed to have occurred “when the contents of wire communications are captured or redirected in any way.” United States v. Rodriguez, 968 F.2d 130, 136 (2d Cir.) (holding both location where conversation was redirected and where it was overheard sufficed as situs of “interception” for jurisdictional purposes), cert. denied, — U.S. -, -, -, 113 S.Ct. 139 , 140, 663, 121 L.Ed.2d 92 ,…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Trindle v. State
See also People v. Caruso, 119 Ill.2d 376, 386 , 116 Ill.Dec. 548 , 519 N.E.2d 440, 444 (1987), cert, denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988) (detaining a child in violation of “any terms of a valid court order” and “removing the child from the jurisdiction of the court” were express statutory elements of the offense).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Schaal
(2×)
See also State v. Bowman, 741 S.W.2d 10 (Mo. banc 1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 60 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pilchak v. Camper
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690 , 104 S.Ct. at 2066 ; see also, Smith v. Ylst, 826 F.2d 872, 976-77 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 829 , 109 S.Ct. 83 , 102 L.Ed.2d 59 (1988) (counsel’s mental illness and subsequent replacement during trial did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel when defendant did not show how counsel’s action prejudiced him).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Neal
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 87-2130.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 3, 1988.
Published
Citer courts: Tenth Circuit (2) · Seventh Circuit (1)
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.