green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.5 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Industrial Burner Systems, Inc. v. Maxon Corp.
no case of which we are aware holds, however, that fluctuations over time to the same customer are 'price discrimination' within the meaning of the robinson-patman act.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Caller-Times Publishing Co. v. Triad Communications, Inc.
following the first circuit's decision in barry wright, we now hold that intent is not a basis of liability (or a ground for inferring the existence of such a basis) in a predatory pricing case under the sherman act.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Santiago
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545, 549-50 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990); United States v. Calle-Cardenas, 837 F.2d 30, 32 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1024 , 108 S.Ct. 1582 , 99 L.Ed.2d 897 (1988).
discussed
Cited "see"
Glennon Paul Sweet v. Paul Delo, Superintendent, Potosi Correctional Center
See Byrd v. Armontrout, 880 F.2d 1, 11 (8th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990); cf. Marshall v. Lonberger, 459 U.S. 422 , 438 n. 6, 103 S.Ct. 843 , 853 n. 6, 74 L.Ed.2d 646 (1983) (suggesting that due process does not require more than Michelson requires).
discussed
Cited "see"
Glennon Paul Sweet v. Paul Delo
See Byrd v. Armontrout, 880 F.2d 1, 11 (8th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990); cf. Marshall v. Lonberger, 459 U.S. 422 , 439 n.6 (1983) (suggesting that due process does not require more than Michelson requires).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Sealed Case (Sentencing Guidelines' \Safety Valve\")"
Although our cases hold that a defendant’s proximity to contraband, combined with “evidence linking the accused to an ongoing criminal operation of which ... possession [of the contraband] is a part,” may support a finding of constructive possession, United States v. Staten, 581 F.2d 878, 885 (D.C.Cir.1978); see United States v. Evans, 888 F.2d 891, 895 (D.C.Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1325 , 108 L.Ed.2d 500 (1990); see also Williams, 952 F.2d at 420 ; Dunn, 846 F.2d at 763-64 , those cases differ significantly from the case before us.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Olayemi Dele Jinadu (95-3833), Moruf Omotola Lawal (95-3900)
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551 n. 6 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Arocho Gonzalez
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551-52 & n. 6 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Arocho Gonzalez
See United ___ ______ States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551-52 & n.6 (1st Cir. 1989), ______ ______ cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Larry W. Smith, James M. Shepherd, Ernesto M. Sanchez, and Benjamin R. Shepherd III
See United States v. Evans, 888 F.2d 891 (D.C.Cir.1989), cert. denied, Curren v. United States, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1325 , 108 L.Ed.2d 500 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Paulino
See United States v. Barnes, 890 ___ _____________ ______ F.2d 545, 549 (1st Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 _____ ______ (1990); see also 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) & (b)(1)(C).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Paulino
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545, 549 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990); see also 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) & (b)(1)(C).
discussed
Cited "see"
Nicholas R. Marino v. United States
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551 n.6 (1st Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990). 22 After the modification, Count III of the indictment stated that Marino "did attempt to possess with the intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, a Schudule [sic] I Controlled Substance in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841 (a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(vii)." It is unclear why the reference to a violation of § 841(b)(1)(B)(vii) was not also deleted.
discussed
Cited "see"
Marino v. United States
See ___ United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551 n.6 (1st Cir. ______________ ______ 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990). _____ ______ After the modification, Count III of the indictment stated that Marino "did attempt to possess with the intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of marihuana, a Schudule [sic] I Controlled Substance in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(vii)." It is unclear why the ___________________ reference to a violation of 841(b)(1)(B)(vii) was not also deleted.
cited
Cited "see"
Marino v. United States
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551 n.6 (1st Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Maxwell Allen, United States of America v. James Casey
See United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 , 551 n. 6 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Donaldson
See also United States v. Galloway, 316 F.3d 624 (6th Cir.2003) In United States v. Lawrence, 1989 WL 153161 (6th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1325 , 108 L.Ed.2d 500 (1990), the Sixth Circuit held that when a defendant seeks to suppress his statements on the basis , that he was not given Miranda warnings, he has the burden of proving by the preponderance of the evidence that he was. entitled to those warnings, because he was subjected to a custodial interrogation.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Stuemke
See also United States v. Galloway, 316 F.3d 624 (6th Cir.2003) In United States v. Lawrence, 892 F.2d 80 , 1989 WL 153161 (6th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1325 , 108 L.Ed.2d 500 (1990), the Sixth Circuit held that when a defendant seeks to suppress his statements on the basis that he was not given Miranda warnings, he has the burden of proving by the preponderance of the evidence that he was entitled to those warnings, because he was subjected to a custodial interrogation.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
McDonald v. Delo
See, e.g., Byrd v. Armontrout, 880 F.2d 1, 7 (8th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jesus M. Lopez-Gil
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Barnes, 890 F.2d 545 (1st Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1326 , 108 L.Ed.2d 501 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gilberto Pineda-Ortuno and Carlos Ramirez-Carranza
See, e.g., United States v. Evans, 888 F.2d 891, 894-95 (D.C.Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1019 , 110 S.Ct. 1325 , 108 L.Ed.2d 500 (1990); United States v. Rosado, 866 F.2d 967, 969-70 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 837 , 110 S.Ct. 117 , 107 L.Ed.2d 79 (1989); Feliz-Cordero, 859 F.2d at 253-54 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Barnes
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 89-6606.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 5, 1990.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: E.D. Michigan (1) · Texas Supreme Court (1)
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.