green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.4 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Joseph Murl Bennett v. Glen Mueller, Warden Terhune, Director Attorney Generalof the State of California
a state procedural rule constitutes an adequate bar to federal court review if it was 'firmly established and regularly followed' at the time it was applied by the state court.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Levin v. Upper Makefield Township
In Leivis, the Court explained the standard that applies when a plaintiff alleges that action taken by an executive official violates substantive due process. 3 The “core of the concept” of due process is “protection against arbitrary action” and “only the most egregious official conduct can be said to be arbitrary in the constitutional sense.” 528 U.S. at 845-46, 118 S.Ct. 1708 (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commonwealth v. Joacine
See United States v. Guzman-Bera , 216 F.3d 1019 , 1020 (11th Cir. 2000) ("an aggravated felony is defined by the sentence actually imposed," citing United States v. Graham , 169 F.3d 787 , 790-791 [3rd Cir.], cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 [1999] ).
cited
Cited "see"
Crawford v. Lampert
See Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573 , 576 n. 4 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
SMALL
See United States v. Graham, 169 F.3d 787, 792-93 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 (1999) (acknowledging a uniformly accepted federal standard for differentiating between felonies and misdemeanors); see also Pacheco v. INS, 225 F.3d 148, 156 (2d Cir. 2000) (Straub, J., dissenting) (“[T]here can be little argument that the word ‘felony’ is commonly understood—and statutorily defined—to include crimes punishable by prison terms of greater than one year.”), cert. denied, 533 U.S. 904 (2001); Matter of Crammond, supra, at 18 (Filppu, concurring) (“The plain or natural reading of…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Isais
See United States v. Navarro, 169 F.3d 228, 232-33 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dannenberg v. Ingle
See Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573, 577 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999) (holding that ineffective assistance of counsel constitutes cause for procedural default only if counsel’s performance was constitutionally ineffective).
discussed
Cited "see"
Freddy Leon Wildman v. Dan Johnson
See Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573, 577 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999) (holding that ineffective assistance of counsel constitutes cause for procedural default only if counsel’s performance was constitutionally ineffective).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Carlos Albverto Prieto
See United States v. Roach, 164 F.3d 403, 410 (8th Cir.1998), cert, denied sub nom., Tail v. United States, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999) (affirming admission of prior consistent statements made in a post-arrest interview); United States v. Tate, 1998 WL 637422 at *3 (4th Cir.1998) (unpublished table decision) (factual finding that admission of prior consistent statements made to police — one prior to arrest, the day of arrest, and one two days after arrest — did not constitute plain error).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Flores v. Hickman
Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68 , 112 S.Ct. 475, 480 , 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991); see also Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573, 584 (9th Cir.) ("Federal habeas courts lack jurisdiction ... to review state court applications of state procedural rules.”), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bennett v. Mueller
Principles Governing Analysis of a State Procedural Rule’s Adequacy. “[T]o constitute an adequate state ground, the procedural rule must be ‘clear, consistently applied, and well-established at the time of petitioner’s purported default.’ ” Powell v. Lambert, 357 F.3d 871, 874 (9th Cir.2004) (citations and internal quotations omitted); see also Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573, 585 (9th Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999) (“[a] state procedural rule constitutes an adequate bar to federal court review if it was ‘firmly established and reg…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nickerson v. Roe
Id. at 578 ; see also Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573, 577 (9th Cir.) (“A state procedural rule constitutes an adequate bar to federal court review if it was firmly established and regularly followed at the time it was applied by the state court.”), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 117 , 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Juan Ezequiel Gonzales-Vela
(2×)
See also United States v. Graham, 169 F.3d 787 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Roberto Echavarria-Escobar, Aka, Roberto Escobar Aka, Baudilo Echeveria Aka, Roberto Car Escobar-Rodriguez
The Eleventh Circuit stated: “We agree with the Third Circuit’s reading of § 1101(a)(43)(G) and its reasoning and hold that an aggravated felony is defined by the sentence actually imposed. ” United States v. Guzman-Bera, 216 F.3d 1019, 1020 (11th Cir.2000) (emphasis added); see also id. (“The [Third Circuit] reasoned that ... there was no evidence that Congress intended to depart from its prior position that an aggravated felony is determined by the imposed imprisonment”) (citing United States v. Graham, 169 F.3d 787, 790 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845 , 120 S.Ct. 116 , 145 …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Dean
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 98-9650.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 1999.
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.