discussed Cited "see" Amarille v. Office of Personnel Management See Amarille v. Office of Personnel Management, 68 M.S.P.R. 424 (1995), aff'd, 78 F.3d 605 (Fed.Cir.1996) (Table), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1010 , 116 S.Ct. 2534 , 135 L.Ed.2d 1057 (1996); Amarille v. Office of Personnel Management, 76 M.S.P.R. 182 (1997), dismissed, 243 F.3d 554 (Fed.Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1165 , 121 S.Ct. 1156 , 148 L.Ed.2d 992 (2001); Fabros v. Office of Personnel Management, 85 M.S.P.R. 400 (2000) (a consolidated request for review).

cited Cited "see" State v. Murillo See State v. Jones, 342 N.C. 457, 464 , *601 466 S.E.2d 696, 699 , cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1010 , 135 L.

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Thompson (2×) See, e.g., State v. Murray, 184 Ariz. 9, 32 , 906 P.2d 542, 565 (1995)(holding that shooting victims "execution-style" shows that defendants had sufficient time to permit reflection), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1010 , 116 S.Ct. 2535 , 135 L.Ed.2d 1057 (1996).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Fleming We have previously held “that in North Carolina, polygraph evidence is no longer admissible in any trial.” State v. Grier, 307 N.C. 628, 645 , 300 S.E.2d 351, 361 (1983); see also State v. Jones, 342 N.C. 457, 466 , 466 S.E.2d 696, 700 , cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1010 , 135 L.

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Ramirez Id,; see also State v. Murray, 184 Ariz. 9, 32 , 906 P.2d 542, 565 (1995), cert. denied, 518 U.S. 1010 , 116 S.Ct. 2535 , 135 L.Ed.2d 1057 and — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 193 , 136 L.Ed.2d 130 (1996) (“To show premeditation, the state must prove that the defendant acted with either the intent or knowledge that he would kill his victim and that such intent or knowledge preceded the killing by a length of time permitting reflection.”) (citing Rankovich); State v. Neal, 143 Ariz. 93, 98 , 692 P.2d 272, 276 (1984) (same); State v. Just, 138 Ariz. 534, 546 , 675 P.2d 1353, 1365 (App.1983) (same).