green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
11.3 score
“he same conduct may constitute a substantial step toward the commission of more 325 than one charged crime, as long as that conduct strongly corroborates the actor's criminal purpose underlying each charged crime.”
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 20 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Galloway
he same conduct may constitute a substantial step toward the commission of more than one charged crime, as long as that conduct strongly corroborates the actor's criminal purpose underlying each charged crime.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Muzzy
he same conduct may constitute a substantial step toward the commission of more 325 than one charged crime, as long as that conduct strongly corroborates the actor's criminal purpose underlying each charged crime.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Dibala
victims were of similar age, degree of maturity and vulnerability and, therefore, were in the same class
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. John C. Kelley
under this statute, intent may, and generally must, be proved circumstantially.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hubbell
See State v. Walters, 311 Or 80, 84 , 804 P2d 1164 , cert den, 501 US 1209 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Ross
See State v. Walters, 311 Or 80, 84 , 804 P2d 1164 , cert den, 501 US 1209 (1991) (in attempt crimes, the state must prove that a defendant intentionally or knowingly engaged in conduct that constituted a “substantial step” towards commission of a crime); State v. Fox, 262 Or App 473, 477-78 , 324 P3d 608 , rev den, 356 Or 163 (2014) (where an attempted crime includes the element of forcible compulsion, the state must prove that a defendant, with the requisite intent, took a substantial step towards forcibly compelling the victim to engage in the act).
discussed
Cited "see"
Deana Tipler v. Douglas County, Nebraska Robert Houston, Director of Douglas County Corrections
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093 , 1102 n. 13 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2807 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991) (a “staffing restriction does not violate Title VII” because “a minimal restriction such as the Unit 5 gender-based staffing restriction does not deprive female employees of any employment opportunities”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Deana Tipler v. Douglas County, NE
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093 , 1102 n.13 (8th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 (1991) (a "staffing restriction does not violate Title VII" because "a minimal restriction such as the Unit 5 gender-based staffing restriction does not deprive female employees of any employment opportunities").
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Ernst
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093, 1102 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2807 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991) (concluding that opposite-sex surveillance of male inmates is constitutionally permissible because minimal intrusions on prisoner’s privacy were outweighed by institutional concerns for safety and equal employment opportunity).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wyatt v. Slagle
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093 , 1100-01 & n. 12 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2807 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991); Madyun v. Franzen, 704 F.2d 954, 956-57 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 996 , 104 S.Ct. 493 , 78 L.Ed.2d 687 (1983).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ashann-Ra v. Com. of Va.
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093, 1101-02 (8th Cir.1990) (minimal intrusions on privacy outweighed by institutional concerns for safety and equal employment opportunity), cert, denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2807 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991); Michenfelder v. Sumner, 860 F.2d 328, 333-34 (9th Cir.1988) (infrequent or casual observation or observation at a distance does not warrant court interference); Grummett v. Rushen, 779 F.2d 491, 496 (9th Cir.1985) (inmates’ privacy needs outweighed by internal security needs and equal employment opportunities); Riddick v. Sutton, 794 F.Supp. 169 (E.D.N.…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Irons
See State v. Walters, 99 Or App 570, 573 , 783 P2d 531 (1989), rev’d on other grounds 311 Or 80 , 804 P2d 1164 , cert den sub nom Walters v. Oregon, 501 US 1209 (1991) (13-year-old complainant and 13-year-old victim of prior rape “were of similar age, degree of maturity and vulnerability and, therefore, were in the same class”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Paula Sneed, Norris Louis McGraw Patrick Johnson, and Sharon Ann Polley
United States v. Nguyen, 28 F.3d 477, 481 (5th Cir.1994); United States v. Pazos, 24 F.3d 660, 665 (5th Cir.1994). 4 ."Where one does an act with knowledge that the use of the mails will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where such use can reasonably be foreseen, even though not actually intended, then he 'causes’ the mails to be used.” Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 8-9 , 74 S.Ct. 358, 363 , 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954); accord United States v. Shively, 927 F.2d 804, 815 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2806 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991). 5 .
cited
Cited "see"
Donald Gene Henthorn v. Michael W. Hester, Correctional Officer
See Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093, 1100 (8th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see"
Clemente v. Carnicon Management
See United States v. Passos- ___ _____________ _______ Paternina, 918 F.2d 979, 986 (1st Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 499 _________ _____ ______ U.S. 982 (1991), and cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 1210 (1991). ___ _____ ______ Whether to permit a jury to conduct a view in a particular situation is a question committed to the trial court's informed discretion.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ortiz
See United States v. Tejeda, 974 F.2d 210, 213 (1st Cir.1992) (“ ‘The fact finder may fairly infer ... that it runs counter. to human experience to suppose that criminal conspirators would welcome innocent non-participants as witnesses to their crimes.’ ” (quoting United States v. Passos-Paternina, 918 F.2d 979, 985 (1st Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2808 , 115 L.Ed.2d 980 (1991))).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Meehan
See, e.g., Gargan v. State, 805 P.2d 998, 999 (Alaska App. 1991) (referring to Alaska statutes “AS 11.56.200(a) and 11.31.110(a)”), cert. denied 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S. Ct. 2808 , 115 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Meehan
See, e.g., Gargan v. State, 805 P.2d 998, 999 (Alaska App. 1991) (referring to “AS 11.56.200(a) and AS 11.31.110(a)”), cert. denied 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S. Ct. 2808 , 115 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hancock v. Thalacker
See, e.g., Fargo, 49 F.3d at 1357 (“This court has recognized that internal security is foremost among the legitimate penological objectives contemplated in Turner,” citing Timm v. Gunter, 917 F.2d 1093, 1099 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1209 , 111 S.Ct. 2807 , 115 L.Ed.2d 979 (1991)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Wallace
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 90-7853.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 10, 1991.
501 U.S. 1209
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Oregon (3) · D.C. Circuit (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.