green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.7 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
ABS Ins., Ltd. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.
rjemoval is not defeated by the fact that, after the case is removed, the plaintiff files a new complaint, deleting the federal claim or stating a claim that is. not removable.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Faulk v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp.
rjemoval is not defeated by the fact that, after the case is removed, the plaintiff files a new complaint, deleting the federal claim or stating a claim thaf is not removable.
discussed
Cited "see"
Baker v. State
(2×)
See United States v. Lewis, 862 F.2d 748, 750 (9th Cir.1988) (authority to alter sentence on remand extended only to illegal portions, and did not empower district court to alier legal punishments previously imposed), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989); United States v. Henry, 709 F.2d 298, 303, 306 (5th Cir.1983) (en banc) (similar).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Herman Phillip Sheets, Jr.
See United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1202 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989) (holding that where the district court reviews the material in camera, we review its determination for clear error).
cited
Cited "see"
Roy C. Turner v. Robert Farley
See Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 426 (7th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dan Lostutter v. Howard A. Peters, Iii, Illinois Department of Corrections, and Roland W. Burris, Attorney General of the State of Illinois
See Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 425 (7th Cir.1988) (“A petitioner’s inability to demonstrate either [the cause or prejudice] prong results in dismissal of his habeas petition before the merits of his claims can be reached.”), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1168 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989). *396 Lostutter claims also that he was deprived of his right to effective assistance of counsel in his trial, appellate, state postconviction, and federal habeas proceedings.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Blue
See United States v. Lewis, 862 F.2d 748, 750 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Furlong
See United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1201 (9th Cir.1988) (magistrate would naturally have assumed that informant was not disinterested citizen), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Sanchez-Sotelo
See United States v. Lowenberg, 853 F.2d 295, 301-02 (5th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Shifflett
See United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989); Carter v. Rafferty, 826 F.2d 1299 (3rd Cir.1987); United States v. Rinn, 586 F.2d 113 (9th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 441 U.S. 931 , 99 S.Ct. 2051 , 60 L.Ed.2d 659 (1979); United States v. Taylor, 542 F.2d 1023 (8th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1074 , *356 97 S.Ct. 813 , 50 L.Ed.2d 792 (1977); United States v. Laurins, 660 F.Supp. 1579 (N.D.Cal.1987). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
Ralph C. Buelow v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
See Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 422 (7th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1168 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. White v. Lane
See Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 425 (7th Cir.1988) (“When considering a habeas petition, ... a federal court must respect a state court’s finding of waiver or procedural default under its own laws”), cert. denied 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1168 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Walker Bennett Monroe
See United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1201-02 (9th Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989). 3 The district court ruled that Bender’s prior inconsistent statements could not be introduced for impeachment purposes since they had not been given under oath pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(1)(A).
cited
Cited "see"
Kenneth L. Johnson v. Chuck Miller and Indiana Attorney General
Id.; see Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 425 (7th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Koby Dean Boyett
See United States v. Lowenberg, 853 F.2d 295, 305 (5th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ronald Stump
District courts do not have inherent power to resentence defendants at any time; their “authority to do so must flow either from the court of appeals mandate under 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (1982) or from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35.” United States v. Minor, 846 F.2d 1184, 1187 (9th Cir.1988); accord United States v. Lewis, 862 F.2d 748, 750 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Earl Harris v. Folk Construction
P. 47(c), advisory committee note (1991 amendment) (“It is not grounds for the dismissal of a juror that the juror refuses to join with fellow jurors in reaching a unanimous verdict.”); see also United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. 1988) (“That a juror may not be removed because he or she disagrees with the other jurors as to the merits of a case requires no citation.”), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Earl Harris, Husband Luvenia Harris, Wife, Appellants/cross-Appellees v. Folk Construction Company, Appellees/cross-Appellants
See Fed.R.Civ.P. 47(c), advisory committee note (1991 amendment) (“It is not grounds for the dismissal of a juror that the juror refuses to join with fellow jurors in reaching a unanimous verdict.”); see also United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir.1988) (“That a juror may not be removed because he or she disagrees with the other jurors as to the merits of a case requires no citation.”), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cheek
See e.g., U.S. v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir.), cert. denied 489 U.S. 1032 (1988); U.S. v. Brown, 823 F.2d 591 (D.C.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Walsh
Compare United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989). 2.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Walsh
Compare United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. _______ _____________ _________ 1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989). _____ ______ 2.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Douglas Murray v. Laborers Union Local No. 324
While Rule 47(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a judge to excuse a juror from service during deliberation for good cause, "[i]t is not grounds for the dismissal of a juror that the juror refuses to join with fellow jurors in reaching a unanimous verdict." Fed.R.Civ.P. 47(c), advisory committee note (1991 amendment); see also United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir.1988) ("That a juror may not be removed because he or she disagrees with the other jurors as to the merits of a case requires no citation."), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (19…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Murray v. Laborers Union Local No. 324
While Rule 47(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a judge to excuse a juror from service during deliberation for good cause, “[i]t is not grounds for the dismissal of a juror that the juror refuses to join with fellow jurors in reaching a unanimous verdict.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 47(c), advisory committee note (1991 amendment); see also United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2d Cir.1988) (“That a juror may not be removed because he or she disagrees with the other jurors as to the merits of a case requires no citation.”), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jieme N. Portin, United States of America v. Ruben Y. Navarro
Under the pre-sentencing guidelines versions of Rule 35, the district court’s authority to correct sentencing errors extended only to the illegal portion of a sentence. 1 See United States v. Jordan, 895 F.2d 512, 514-515 (9th Cir.1989); Kennedy v. United States, 330 F.2d 26, 27 (9th Cir.1964); see also United States v. Lewis, 862 F.2d 748, 750 (9th Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989); Contreras-Subias, 13 F.3d at 1344 (“The Kennedy-Jordan line of cases ... contemplate^] situations in which a sentence was composed of legal and illegal ‘portio…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Barone
In declining to do so, the court was aware that a defendant has a right to a unanimous verdict, Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972), and that “a court may not dismiss a juror during deliberations if the request for discharge stems from doubts the juror harbors about the sufficiency of the government’s evidence,” United States v. Brown, 823 F.2d 591, 596 (D.C.Cir.1987); see also United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17, 23 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989). *1020 In the present case, the issue of Mr. Berg…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Washington
See e.g., United States v. Lewis, 787 F.2d 1318, 1322 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989). 4 The Second Circuit appears to have adopted the case-by-case approach.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Washington
See e.g., United States v. Lewis, 787 F.2d 1318, 1322 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1169 , 103 L.Ed.2d 227 (1989). [4] The Second Circuit appears to have adopted the case-by-case approach.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Joan Betts Diplarakos v. Susan Poole, Warden
See, e.g., United States v. Hernandez, 862 F.2d 17 (2nd Cir.1988) (reversing conviction due to removal of sole juror favoring acquittal and due to judge's comments commending remaining jurors for efforts to persuade the dismissed juror), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989); United States v. Brown, 823 F.2d 591 (D.C.Cir.1987) (juror cannot be dismissed during deliberations if juror's request for dismissal may have stemmed from juror's doubts about the evidence). 18 These cases, however, not only are factually distinguishable from Diplarakos' case, but were all decided on direct review.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Otis R. Jones v. Jack Duckworth, and Indiana Attorney General
See also Buelow v. Dickey, 847 F.2d 420, 428-29 (7th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989); United States ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michael Clark Brei
See, e.g., United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1201 (9th Cir.1988) (probation file evidence bearing on credibility may be used to impeach witness), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 (1989) 4 Brei's plea bargain was not rendered illusory by the government's reservation of this discretion.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Patrick Joseph Greany
See, e.g., United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197, 1201 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Danny Michael Weeks
The court must “consider whether the prosecutor’s comments deprived defendants of a fair trial in light of ... the magnitude of the prejudicial effect of the statements, the efficacy of any cautionary instructions, and the strength of the evidence of defendant’s guilt.” United States v. Jones, 839 F.2d 1041, 1050 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1024 , 108 S.Ct. 1999 , 100 L.Ed.2d 230 (1988); see also United States v. Lowenberg, 853 F.2d 295, 302 (5th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1032 , 109 S.Ct. 1170 , 103 L.Ed.2d 228 (1989).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Henry
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 88-6302.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 21, 1989.
489 U.S. 1032
Published
Citer courts: E.D. Texas (2)
C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.