green
Positive treatment
5.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Persico
See generally United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 126 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 , 120 S.Ct. 439 , 145 L.Ed.2d 344 (1999); United States v. Concepcion, 983 F.2d 369, 381 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 856 , 114 S.Ct. 163 , 126 L.Ed.2d 124 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wayne Douglas Shevi
See United States v. Lindsay, 184 F.3d 1138, 1142-43 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 981 , 120 S.Ct. 438 , 145 L.Ed.2d 343 (1999); United States v. Williams, 154 F.3d 655, 656-58 (6th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1113 , 119 S.Ct. 889 , 142 L.Ed.2d 788 (1999).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Reyes Pena
See United States v. Lindsay, 184 F.3d 1138, 1142 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 438 , 145 L.Ed.2d 343 (1999).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. David W. Trenter
See United States v. Mejiar-Sanchez, 172 F.3d 1172, 1174 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, —* U.S.-, 120 S.Ct. 438 , 145 L.Ed.2d 343 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dearstyne v. Mazzuca
In Rahman , the Second Circuit noted that while the Government’s loss of evidence may deprive a defendant of the right to a fair trial, “[w]hether that loss warrants sanctions depends on the Government’s culpability for the loss and its prejudicial effect.” Id. (citing United States v. Bakhtiar, 994 F.2d 970, 975-76 (2d Cir.1993); see also Colon v. Kuhlmann, 865 F.2d 29, 30 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 , 120 S.Ct. 439 , 145 L.Ed.2d 344 (1999) (explaining that the record must first show that evidence has been lost and that this loss is “chargeable to the State.”)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ryan-Webster
As the Fifth Circuit explained in construing the 1986 amendments, "Con- gress expanded the proscription of the statute from being limited to required entry documents to any documents prescribed either by stat- ute or by regulation for entry into the United States." United States v. Osiemi, 980 F.2d 344, 346 (5th Cir. 1993) (emphasis in original) (holding that counterfeit passports fall within "prescribed" language of § 1546(a) even though they are not always "required for entry"); see also United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 118-19 (2d Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 (2000) (agreeing…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Sylvia Anita Ryan-Webster
(2×)
As the Fifth Circuit explained in construing the 1986 amendments, "Congress expanded the proscription of the statute from being limited to required entry documents to any documents prescribed either by statute or by regulation for entry into the United States." United States v. Osiemi, 980 F.2d 344, 346 (5th Cir.1993) (emphasis in original) (holding that counterfeit passports fall within "prescribed" language of § 1546(a) even though they are not always "required for entry"); see also United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 118-19 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 , 120 S.Ct. 439 , 145 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States of America, Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Gregory Ferguson, AKA \Black Greggo
See, e.g., United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 126-27 (2d Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 , 120 S.Ct. 439 , 145 L.Ed.2d 344 (1999); United States v. Diaz, 176 F.3d 52, 94-95 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 875 , 120 S.Ct. 181 , 145 L.Ed.2d 153 (1999); Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 382-83 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dominic Bernardine
A sentencing court “has supervisory power over the defendant’s term of supervised release.” United States v. Davis, 151 F.3d 1304, 1306 (10th Cir. 1998); see also United States v. Mejia-Sanchez, 172 F.3d 1172, 1175 (9th Cir. 1999) (“A district court has supervisory authority over and maintains a relationship of trust with a defendant on supervised release.”), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 982 (1999). 5 18 U.S.C. § 401 (3).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Dominic Bernardine
(2×)
A sentencing court “has supervisory power over the defendant’s term of supervised release." United States v. Davis, 151 F.3d 1304, 1306 (10th Cir.1998); see also United States v. Mejia-Sanchez, 172 F.3d 1172, 1175 (9th Cir. 1999) (“A district court has supervisory authority over and maintains a relationship of trust with a defendant on supervised release.”), cer t. denied, 528 U.S. 982 , 120 S.Ct. 438 , 145 L.Ed.2d 343 (1999). 2 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mejia-Sanchez
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 99-6459.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 1, 1999.
Cited by 10 opinions | Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.