green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.8 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. George Tsosie
speedy trial act only protects the defendant against delay, not the trial itself, so that awaiting final judgment to appeal will not cause defendant irreparable harm.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Koslik
See State v. Daniels, 207 Conn. 374, 387 , 542 A.2d 306 (on state’s direct appeal, no double jeopardy violation because Practice Book § 935 [now 8 43-22] provides “the power, at any time, to correct a sentence that is illegal”), after remand for articulation, 209 Conn. 225 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S. Ct. 1349 , 103 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Lawrence
See State v. Daniels, 207 Conn. 374, 387 , 542 A.2d 306 (“[b]oth the trial court and [the Supreme Court], on appeal, have the power, at any time, to correct a sentence that is illegal”), after remand for articulation, 209 Conn. 225 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S. Ct. 1349 , 103 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Peeler, No. Cr99 14 83 96 (Jul. 11, 2000)
See State v. Daniels , 209 Conn. 225 , 231 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989) (Daniels II).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Diaz, No. Cr96 0122715t (Aug. 12, 1998)
This CT Page 8619 difficult and delicate process necessarily involves a careful consideration by the court of such factors as the strength of the state's case, the likelihood of conviction, the severity of the crime, its effect on the victim, the strength of the defendant's defense, the defendant's personal situation, and all the other myriad factors that underlie a judgment regarding fundamental fairness.' State v. Dills , supra, 19 Conn. App. 503 -04; see State v. Daniels , 209 Conn. 225 , 238 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989); State…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Kinchen
This difficult and delicate process necessarily involves a careful consideration by the court of such factors as the strength of the state’s case, the likelihood of conviction, the severity of the crime, its effect on the victim, the strength of the defendant’s defense, the defendant’s personal situation, and all the other myriad factors that underlie a judgment regarding fundamental fairness.” State v. Dills, supra, 19 Conn. App. 503 -504; see State v. Daniels, 209 Conn. 225, 238 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S. Ct. 1349 , 103 L.
cited
Cited "see"
IFT v. State
See Benson v. State, 526 So.2d 948 (Fla.2d DCA), rev. denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla. 1988), cert. denied, Benson v. Florida, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
I.F.T. v. State
See Benson v. State, 526 So.2d 948 (Fla.2d DCA), rev. denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, Benson v. Florida, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
Mayhue v. St. Francis Hospital of Wichita, Inc.
See United States v. Hornung, 848 F.2d 1040, 1044-45 (10th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989); Day, 830 F.2d at 1103 .
cited
Cited "see"
59 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 405, 59 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 41,672 Bertha E. Mayhue, and Cross-Appellee v. St. Francis Hospital of Wichita, Inc., and Cross-Appellant
See United States v. Hornung, 848 F.2d 1040, 1044-45 (10th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989); Day, 830 F.2d at 1103 .
cited
Cited "see"
Shawmut Bank, N.A. v. Valley Farms
See State v. Daniels, 209 Conn. 225 , 229 n.1, 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S. Ct. 1349 , 103 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Lee v. State
See United States v. Hornung, 848 F.2d 1040, 1045 (10th Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989); United States v. Bruscino, 687 F.2d 938, 940-41 (7th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1228 , 103 S.Ct. 1235 , 75 L.Ed.2d 468 (1983); Miller v. United States, 403 F.2d 77 , 83 n. 11 (2nd Cir.1968).
cited
Cited "see"
M.S. v. State
See Benson v. State, 526 So.2d 948, 955 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lin Edward Davis
See United States v. Blankenship, 870 F.2d 326, 330-31 (6th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1068 , 109 S.Ct. 1347 , 103 L.Ed.2d 815 (1989); United States v. Bloom, 834 F.2d 16, 19 (1st Cir.1987); United States v. Stotts, 792 F.2d 1318, 1323-24 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. McFarland (Concurrence)
This difficult and delicate process neces- sarily involves a careful consideration by the court of such factors as the strength of the state’s case, the likelihood of conviction, the severity of the crime, its effect on the victim, the strength of the defendant’s defense, the defendant’s personal situation, and all the other myriad factors that underlie a judgment regarding fundamental fairness.’’ (Citation omitted.) State v. Dills, 19 Conn. App. 495 , 503–504, 563 A.2d 733 (1989); see also State v. Daniels, 209 Conn. 225, 238 , 550 A.2d 885 (1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 10…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Charles DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant
Id.; see also United States v. Hornung, 848 F.2d 1040, 1045 (10th Cir.1988) (under Rule 606(b), questioning of a juror who has been exposed to extraneous information “is limited to the circumstances and nature of the improper contact” and questions bearing on the “subjective effect of the contact on the juror’s decision-malting” are prohibited), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kathleen Joan Johnson
See e.g., United States v. Hornung, 848 F.2d 1040, 1046-47 (10th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Paul G. Robinson v. Joseph Ponte
See also Hicks v. Callahan, 859 F.2d 1054, 1057-58 (1st Cir. 1988) (where state court declines to apply retroactively, on collateral review, its new rule that, where an underlying felony is unarmed robbery, the felony murder rule applies only if the jury finds that the defendant consciously disregarded risk to human life, there is no valid federal constitutional reason to do so), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 1069 , 109 S.Ct. 1349 , 103 L.Ed.2d 817 (1989); La Rue v. McCarthy, 833 F.2d 140, 143 (9th Cir.1987) (there is no federal due process violation when a state court declines to apply retroactively…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Redwine
v.
Georgia
v.
Georgia
No. 88-6319.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 6, 1989.
Published
Citer courts: Tenth Circuit (1)
Ct. App. Ga. Certio-rari denied.