green
Positive treatment
7.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 20 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Gallion
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 195 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 224 (1994) (stating the victim’s position of sitting in a chair with a pillow or blanket on his chest indicated a lack of provocation on his part), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 115 S. Ct. 2565 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Gallion
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 195 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 224 (1994) (stating the victim’s position of sitting in a chair with a pillow or blanket on his chest indicated a lack of provocation on his part), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 115 S. Ct. 2565 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Williams
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 192 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 223 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Raines
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 200-01 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 227-28 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Carroll
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 202 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 229 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Kemmerlin
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 202 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 229 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Leazer
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 195 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 224 (1994) (where one victim was seated *239 when he was shot, “there was no evidence — only conjecture — supporting defendant’s theory that he shot the victims spontaneously during an altercation”), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Parker v. Turpin
See Brecheen v. Reynolds, 41 F.Bd 1343 (10th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 115 S.Ct. 2564 , 132 L.Ed.2d 817 (1995); see also Ylst v. Nunnemaker, 501 U.S. 797, 804, n. 3 , 111 S.Ct. 2590, 2595, n. 3 , 115 L.Ed.2d 706 (1991) (“[A] later state decision based upon ineligibility for farther state review neither rests upon procedural default nor lifts a pre-existing procedural default[;] its effect upon the availability of federal habeas is nil[.]”).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hall
See State v. Robinson, 327 N.C. 346, 356-57 , 395 S.E.2d 402, 408 (1990), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Nobles
See State v. Robinson, 339 N.C. 263, 273 , 451 S.E.2d 196, 202 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Cintron
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 195 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 224 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Petty
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 197 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 225 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Warren
See State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 201 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 228 (1994), cert, denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Spindle v. Tillery
See Klein v. Neal, 45 F.3d 1395, 1400 (10th Cir. 1995) ("habeas corpus petitioner may excuse a procedural default by demonstrating either 'cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law, or ... that failure to consider the claims will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice.'") (quoting Brecheen v. Reynolds, 41 F.3d 1343, 1353 (10th Cir. 1994), cert denied, 515 U.S. 1135 (1995)). -6- Spindle's court-martial.
discussed
Cited "see"
Thomas W. Spindle v. N/f/n Tillery, Commandant
See Klein v. Neal, 45 F.3d 1395, 1400 (10th Cir.1995) ("habeas corpus petitioner may excuse a procedural default by demonstrating either 'cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law, or ... that failure to consider the claims will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice.' ") (quoting Brecheen v. Reynolds, 41 F.3d 1343, 1353 (10th Cir.1994), cert denied, 515 U.S. 1135 (1995))
discussed
Cited "see"
Braun v. State
(2×)
See Brecheen v. Reynolds, 41 F.3d 1343 (10th Cir.1994), cert, denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 115 S.Ct. 2564 , 132 L.Ed.2d 817 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Campbell
“If the alleged misstatement of law was made, it was cured by the trial court’s correct jury instructions on the relevant law.” State v. Price, 344 N.C. 583, 594 , 476 S.E.2d 317, 323-24 (1996) (citing State v. Anderson, 322 N.C. 22, 38 , 366 S.E.2d 459, 468 (1988)); see also State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 197 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 225-26 (1994) (prosecutor’s error in defining the term “reasonable doubt” was cured because the trial court’s instruction, “which followed the complained-of statement by the prosecutor, remedied the error, if any, in the prosecutor’s closing argument”)…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Meyer
Defense counsel’s questions must “amount to a proper inquiry into whether the juror could follow the law as instructed by the trial judge.” Id.; see also State v. Robinson, 339 N.C. 263, 273 , 451 S.E.2d 196, 202 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Braxton
Jurors should not be asked what kind of verdict they would render under certain named circumstances.” State v. Phillips, 300 N.C. 678, 682 , 268 S.E.2d 452, 455 (1980); see also State v. Robinson, 339 N.C. 263, 273 , 451 S.E.2d 196, 202 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Monk
See also State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 189-90 , 451 S.E.2d 211, 220-21 (1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1135 , 132 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Adams
v.
California
v.
California
No. 94-8914.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 12, 1995.
Published
Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.