green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
11.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2012–2015 · 2 courts ·
…absence of explicitly threatening language does not preclude the finding of a threat
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
V.J. v. N.J.
an absence of explicitly threatening language does not preclude the finding of a threat
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
A.T. v. C.R.
absence of explicitly threatening language does not preclude the finding of a threat
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
O'BRIEN v. Borowski
absence of explicitly threatening language does not preclude the finding of a threat
cited
Cited "see"
Freddie Fritz Willhite v. State
See DeVille v. Whitley, 21 F.3d 654, 657 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Freddie Fritz Willhite v. State
See DeVille v. Whitley , 21 F.3d 654, 657 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 513 U.S. 968 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
No. 982015
See Dokes v. Lockhart, 992 F.2d 833, 836 (8th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 (1994); Salam v. Lockhart, 874 F.2d 525, 527 (8th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Carlton Reed
See Dokes v. Lockhart, 992 F.2d 833, 836 (8th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 , 115 S.Ct. 437 , 130 L.Ed.2d 348 (1994); Salam v. Lockhart, 874 F.2d 525, 527 (8th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cook
See, e.g., United States v. Malik, 16 F.3d 45, 51 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 , 115 S. Ct. 435 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jackson
See also United States v. Malik, 16 F.3d 45, 50-51 (2d Cir.) (finding application of 18 U.S.C. § 876 , which criminalizes mailing threatening communications, constitutional where jury found threat was unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 , 115 S.Ct. 435 , 130 L.Ed.2d 347 (1994); United States v. Baudin, 486 F.Supp. 403, 406 (S.D.N.Y.1980) ("rejecting defendant's First Amendment challenge to indictment where threat to injure persons, charged under 18 U.S.C. § 875 (c), was sufficiently unequivocal, unconditional, immediate and specific ... to convey a…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Dickens
See, e.g., State v. Ramirez, 178 Ariz. 116, 129 , 871 P.2d 237, 250 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 968 , 115 S.Ct. 435 , 130 L.Ed.2d 347 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Prisinzano
(Supra, at 708; see also, United States v Malik, 16 F3d 45, 51 [2d Cir], cert denied 513 US 968 ; People v Dietze, supra, 75 NY2d, at 53-54 .) To make this determination, the Court in Watts looked to the context under which the words had been uttered, the conditional nature of the statement, and the reaction of the listeners who laughed at these remarks, and found the words spoken by Watts were mere political hyperbole, protected by the First Amendment.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rivera Demuniz
v.
Oregon Parole Board
v.
Oregon Parole Board
No. 94-5817.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 31, 1994.
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.