green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
10.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1992 ·
…under the sentencing guidelines, the amount of the drug being negotiated, even in an uncompleted distribution, shall be used to calculate the total amount in order to determine the base level.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 48 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Bay Area Nuclear Waste Coalition v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., Secretary of Interior, State of California, U.S. Ecology Inc., Applicants-Appellants
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
But see Portland Audubon Society v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302, 308-09 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 (1989) (party asserting economic interest has no right to intervene as defendant in NEPA case).
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Timothy Wayne Morrow (89-5418/5708) and George Mooneyham (89-5710)
(2×)
under the sentencing guidelines, the amount of the drug being negotiated, even in an uncompleted distribution, shall be used to calculate the total amount in order to determine the base level.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Maling
the question of whether there is a single or multiple conspiracy is one of fact for the jury.
cited
Cited "see"
Riordan v. Barbosa, No. 395945 (Mar. 1, 1999)
See Perry v. Moran , 109 Wash.2d 691 , 748 P.2d 224 (1987) [cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3228 , 106 L.Ed.2d 577 (1988)]; Wolf Co. v. Waldron , 51 Ill.
discussed
Cited "see"
Lagrone v. State
(2×)
See Bennett v. State, 766 S.W.2d 227, 231 (Tex.Cr.App.), cer t. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3229 , 106 L.Ed.2d 578 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Aetna Casualty Surety Company v. P & B Autobody, Arsenal Auto Repairs, Inc., Aetna Casualty Surety Company v. Rodco Autobody, Betty Arhaggelidis, Aetna Casualty Surety Company v. P & B Autobody, Betty Arhaggelidis
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989). 15 One of the body shops, Rodco/P & B Autobody, was owned and operated by defendant Petros Arhaggelidis, who has not appealed the judgment against him.
cited
Cited "see"
Aetna Casualty Surety Co. v. P & B Autobody
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ovalle Marquez
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Guyon
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Melvin
See United States v. RiveraSantiago, 872 F.2d 1073 , 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. James F. Melvin, United States v. Michael C. Habicht, United States v. Patrick J. Nee, United States v. Robert Emmett Joyce, United States v. James M. Murphy, United States v. Michael C. Habicht, United States v. Robert Emmett Joyce, United States v. James F. Melvin, United States v. James M. Murphy, Jr., United States v. Patrick J. Nee, United States v. Michael O. McNaught United States v. Michael O. McNaught
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Welch
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989); United States v. Baines, 812 F.2d 41, 42 (1st Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited "see"
Boyd Didrickson and Marina Katelnikoff Beck, Plaintiff-Intervenors v. United States Department of the Interior, and Friends of the Sea Otter, Defendant-Intervenors. Alaska Sea Otter Commission and Ilarion Pletnikoff v. United States Department of the Interior, and Friends of the Sea Otter, Defendant-Intervenors
See Portland Audubon Soc'y v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 , 308 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3229 , 106 L.Ed.2d 577 (1989). 45 The party who seeks to invoke federal jurisdiction has the burden of establishing that it has suffered an injury in fact, "an invasion of a legally-protected interest" that is concrete and particularized, and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.
cited
Cited "see"
Didrickson v. United States Department of the Interior
See Portland Audubon Soc’y v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 , 308 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3229 , 106 L.Ed.2d 577 (1989).
cited
Cited "see"
State of Alaska, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. United States of America National Park Service Manuel R. Lujan, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Interior, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. National Parks and Conservation Association, Inc. Alaska Center for the Environment Sierra Club, Inc. The Wilderness Society, Plaintiff-Intervenor- Appellants/cross-Appellees
See Portland Audobon Soc'y v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 , 308 n. 1 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Coleman v. St. Vincent De Paul Society
See United States Marshals Service v. Means, 741 F.2d 1053, 1057 (8th Cir.1984), rev’d on other grounds, 858 F.2d 404 (8th Cir.1988) (en banc), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 575 (1989); Hubbard, 698 F.2d at 288-89 ; Badman v. Stark, 139 F.R.D. 601, 606 (M.D.Pa.1991); Newson v. Harrison, 687 F.Supp. 360, 361-62 (W.D.Tenn.1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Arthur Hill
See United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989) (clearly erroneous standard applicable to district court’s application of guidelines).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Shmuel David, United States of America v. Jaime Toro Aristizibal, United States of America v. Amparo Toro Aristizibal, United States of America v. Yehuda Yarden
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 , --- U.S. ----, 110 S.Ct. 105 , 107 L.Ed.2d 68 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Octavio Font-Ramirez
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1088 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989); Porcaro v. United States, 784 F.2d 38, 44 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 916 , 107 S.Ct. 320 , 93 L.Ed.2d 293 (1986).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. David
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 , — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 105 , 107 L.Ed.2d 68 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Seattle Audubon Society v. Robertson
See Portland Audubon Society v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3229 , 106 L.Ed.2d 577 (1989); Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan, 884 F.2d 1233 (9th Cir.1989), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 1470 , 108 L.Ed.2d 608 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Seattle Audubon Society v. F. Dale Robertson
See Portland Audubon Society v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 911 , 109 S.Ct. 3229 , 106 L.Ed.2d 577 (1989); Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan, 884 F.2d 1233 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 110 S.Ct. 1470 , 108 L.Ed.2d 608 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Rene Alvarez-Cardenas
See United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989) (in a case where some distribution had occurred, the court found that “[ujnder the sentencing guidelines, the amount of the drug being negotiated, even in an uncompleted distribution, shall be used to calculate the total amount in order to determine the base level”).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Boylan
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989); United States v. Drougas, 748 F.2d 8, 17 (1st Cir.1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Peter Boylan, United States of America v. John E. Carey, United States of America v. Thomas J. Connolly, United States of America v. Matthew A. Kilroe, United States of America v. John F. McCormick United States of America v. Kenneth J. Nave, United States of America v. Francis X. Sheehan
See United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989); United States v. Drougas, 748 F.2d 8, 17 (1st Cir.1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Susan Brooks
See United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.1989) (limiting appellate review of sentencing to a determination of whether the district court abused its discretion or made clearly erroneous findings of fact), cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 3227 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Munoz Franco
See also United States v. Garcia-Rosa, 876 F.2d 209, 232 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989) (government must know testimony is false); United States v. Bucci, 839 F.2d 825, 831 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 844 , 109 S.Ct. 117 , 102 L.Ed.2d 91 (1988) (prosecutor is not normally under duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to grand jury, nor obliged to impeach its own witnesses).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Coleman
See also United States v. Garcia-Rosa, 876 F.2d 209, 232 (1st Cir.1989), ce rt. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989) (government must know testimony is false); United States v. Bucci, 839 F.2d 825, 831 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 844 , 109 S.Ct. 117 , 102 L.Ed.2d 91 (1988) (prosecutor is not normally under duty to disclose exculpatory evidence to grand jury, nor obliged to impeach its own witnesses).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Houlihan
See, e.g., United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1079 (1st Cir.) (explaining that proof of a charged conspiracy requires, inter alia, proof of intent to commit the substantive offense), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 & 493 U.S. 832 , 110 S.Ct. 105 , 107 L.Ed.2d 68 (1989); United States v. Loder, 23 F.3d 586, 591 (1st Cir.1994) (stating that an aider and abettor must “consciously share[ ] the specific criminal intent of the principals”); 18 U.S.C. § 1958 (specifically requiring proof that the defendant acted with “intent that a murder be committe…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States of America (93-5156) v. Jeffrey Otis Peters (93-5153) and Marisha Lynn Winton (93-5154)
Given the district court’s opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses, we are also required to “give due deference to the district court’s application of the guidelines to the facts.” 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (e); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.) (applying Section 3742), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Michael Apelt
See, e.g., United States v. Halliburton, 870 F.2d 557, 560-61 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 575 (1989); United States v. Figueroa-Espinoza, 454 F.2d 590 (9th Cir.1972); United States v. Ware, 897 F.2d 1538, 1541-42 (10th Cir.1990), ce rt. denied, 496 U.S. 930 , 110 S.Ct. 2629 , 110 L.Ed.2d 649 (1990).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gerry E. Blanchard
See also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative v. Brown
The court found that the flooding potential was a sufficient “injury,” for standing purposes, but held that plaintiff failed to adequately demonstrate that its injuries were caused by the defendants’ inaction or were likely to be redressed by the relief sought: “[E]ven if the preparation of an EIS should lead to removal of the leopard darter from the threatened species list, this would not ensure the funding or construction of the projects [plaintiff] desires.” Id., at 255 ; see also Portland Audubon Soc’y v. Hodel, 866 F.2d 302 , 309 (9th Cir.1989) (denying intervention to timber …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Kenneth O. Nichols
(2×)
The commentary to section 2D1.4, however, makes clear that an amount involved in an earlier transaction should be counted unless "the defendant did not intend to produce and was not reasonably capable of producing the negotiated amount." U.S.S.G. § 2D1.4, comment. (n. 1) (emphasis added); see also United States v. Gonzales, 929 F.2d 213, 216 (6th Cir.1991) (under section 2D1.4, " 'the amount of the drug being negotiated, even in an uncompleted distribution, shall be used to calculate the total amount in order to determine the base level' ") (quoting United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6t…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Julio Alberto Tejada, Mancebo, United States of America v. Winston Cabrera
Application Note 1 to § 2D1.4 further explains that “[i]f the defendant is convicted of an offense involving negotiation to traffic in a controlled substance, the weight under negotiation in an uncompleted distribution shall be used to calculate the applicable amount.” Addressing this same issue, the Ninth Circuit, holding that the negotiated amount defined the scope of a conspiracy, stressed that “[t]he fact that a little less is distributed does not affect the computation.” United States v. Alvarez-Cardenas, 902 F.2d 734, 736 (9th Cir.1990); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Angel Marquez
Compare, e.g., United States v. Rafferty, 911 F.2d 227, 282 (9th Cir.1990) (“The guidelines require the court to impose a fine unless the defendant establishes an inability to pay.”), and United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.) (same), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989), with United States v. Walker, 900 F.2d 1201, 1206 (8th Cir.1990) (per curiam) (“When imposing any fine, the district court must consider the defendant’s ability to pay, in light of his earning capacity, and the burden the fine places on the defendant.”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lockhart v. Kenops
Lyng, 108 S.Ct. at 1325 ; see also United States v. Means, 858 F.2d 404, 407 (8th Cir.1988) (listing cases refusing to overturn governmental land management decisions challenged by Indians on free exercise grounds), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 575 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lockhart v. Kenops
Lyng, 108 S.Ct. at 1325 ; see also United States v. Means, 858 F.2d 404, 407 (8th Cir.1988) (listing cases refusing to overturn governmental land management decisions challenged by Indians on free exercise grounds), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 910 , 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 575 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Harold G. Miller
(2×)
Sec. 3742 (e)); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47-48 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989), and we find that the district court's determination was not clearly erroneous. 27 AFFIRMED. 28 BOYCE F. MARTIN Jr., Circuit Judge, concurring. 29 I join Judge Guy's opinion upholding the sentence imposed upon the defendant, Harold Miller.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Calvin Leroy Brooks
United States v. Sangineto-Miranda, 859 F.2d 1501, 1508 (6th Cir.1988); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.) ("A finding is 'clearly erroneous' when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.") cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 3227 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jaime Leon Gomez-Norena
See also United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1083 (1st Cir.) (absent a continuing objection, parties can expect court to reconsider earlier ruling only by making repeated objections on same grounds), cert. denied sub nom., Castro-Poupart v. United States, - U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989), and Romero-Lopez v. United States, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 105 , 107 L.Ed.2d 68 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Joseph J. Christoph
Also, a reviewing court must “give due deference to the district court’s application of the guidelines to the facts.” Id.; see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Timothy Don Ware and Steve Alan Daniels
Recently, a number of circuits have upheld the principle that “ ‘in the absence of a showing of prejudice ... a fleeting glance by jurors of a defendant outside the courtroom in handcuffs does not justify a new trial.’ ” United States v. Garcia-Rosa, 876 F.2d 209, 236 (1st Cir.1989) (citation omitted), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 742 , 107 L.Ed.2d 760 (1989); see also United States v. Halliburton, 870 F.2d 557, 560-61 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 575 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Stanley Ferryman
See, e.g., United States v. Rivera-Santiago, 872 F.2d 1073, 1090 (1st Cir.) (describing result), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989); United States v. Santamaria, 788 F.2d 824, 829 (1st Cir.1986) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Mary Louise Carter Johnson
United States v. Smith, 887 F.2d 104 (6th Cir.1989); United States v. Sailes, 872 F.2d 735, 737-739 (6th Cir.1989); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989) (quantities of drugs that were the subject of unconsummated negotiations may be used to calculate the base level of the offense). 70 In the alternative, defendant challenges the method of calculating how many tablets Ms. Johnson sold to Ms. Nehring, Mr. Chandler, and Ms. Hall.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Virgile Jeffrey Barrett (88-6410) and Jeffrey B. Dolan (88-6411)
Section 3B1.1(c) of the Guidelines provides for a two-level increase in offense level “[i]f the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor in any criminal activity....” Whether Dolan was “an organizer, leader, manager or supervisor” is a question of fact reviewable “under the clearly erroneous standard, giving due regard to the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses.” United States v. Barreto, 871 F.2d 511, 512 (5th Cir.1989); see also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 48 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 5…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Bobby L. Kennedy
See also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3227 , 106 L.Ed.2d 576 (1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Denita M. Kinnard
See also United States v. Perez, 871 F.2d 45, 47 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 3227 (1989); United States v. Mejia-Orosco, 867 F.2d 216, 219 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 3257 (1989). 21 In the present case, the district court found an aggravating circumstance existed not taken into consideration in the formulation of the Guidelines.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Britt, aka Klein
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 88-7315.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 26, 1989.
Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (2) · D. Massachusetts (1)
C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.