green
Positive treatment
5.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Love v. Martuscello
See United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 201 (2d Cir. 2000) (“[C]ounsel’s decision as to ‘whether to call specific witnesses— even ones that might offer exculpatory evidence—is ordinarily not viewed as a lapse in professional representation.’”) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 (2001). “[T]here is no per se rule that requires trial attorneys to seek out an expert.” Gersten v. Senkowski, 426 F.3d 588, 609 (2d Cir. 2005).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fox v. Martuscello
See United States v. DiTomasso, 932 F.3d 58, 69-70 (2d Cir. 2019) (“Trial counsel’s ‘[aJ]ctions or omissions . . . that might be considered sound trial strategy,’ including decisions not to ‘call specific witnesses—even ones that might offer exculpatory evidence—[are] ordinarily not viewed as a lapse in professional representation.’”) (quoting United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 201 (2d Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 (2001)).
discussed
Cited "see"
McIntosh Ex Rel. Estate of McIntosh v. Smith
See Brown v. Bryan County, Oklahoma, 219 F.3d 450, 458 (5th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1734 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001). “[U]nder certain circumstances, § 1983 liability can attach for a single decision not to train [or supervise] an individual officer even where there has been no pattern of previous constitutional violations.” Id. at 459.
discussed
Cited "see"
Rosario-Dominguez v. United States
Thus, the “failure to call a witness for tactical reasons of trial strategy does not satisfy the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel.” United States v. Eyman, 313 F.3d 741, 743 (2d Cir.2002) (per curiam) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1021 , 123 S.Ct. 1949 , 155 L.Ed.2d 864 (2003); accord United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 201 (2d Cir.2000) (“[Cjounsel’s decision as to whether to call specific witnesses—even ones that might offer exculpatory evidence—'is ordinarily not viewed as a lapse in professional representation.” (internal quotation marks and citat…
discussed
Cited "see"
Bluitt v. Houston Independent School District
Johnson v. Moore, 958 F.2d 92, 94 (5th Cir.1992) (quoting Bennett v. City of Slidell, 735 F.2d 861, 862 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1016 , 105 S.Ct. 3476 , 87 L.Ed.2d 612 (1985)); accord Brown v. Bryan County, 219 F.3d 450, 462 (5th Cir.2000), ce rt. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1734 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); Eugene v. Alief Indep.
discussed
Cited "see"
Bluitt v. Houston Independent School Dist.
Johnson v. Moore, 958 F.2d 92, 94 (5th Cir.1992) (quoting Bennett v. City of Slidell, 735 F.2d 861, 862 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 472 U.S. 1016 , 105 S.Ct. 3476 , 87 L.Ed.2d 612 (1985)); accord Brown v. Bryan County, 219 F.3d 450, 462 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1734 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); Eugene v. Alief Indep.
discussed
Cited "see"
National Federation of Republican Assemblies v. United States
See Becker v. Federal Election Commission, 230 F.3d 381, 385-86 (1st Cir.2000)(for standing purposes, the causal connection between the FEC's allowance of corporate funds to underwrite presidential debates and a candidate’s exclusion from the debates was not broken by his choice to refuse corporate contributions), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); cf. Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11, 25 , 118 S.Ct. 1777 , 141 L.Ed.2d 10 (1998)(for standing purposes, the causal connection between an agency's action based on improper grounds and the plaint…
discussed
Cited "see"
Murden v. Artuz
See United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 201 (2d Cir.2000). (“[Counsel’s decision as to ‘whether to call specific witnesses — even ones that might offer exculpatory evidence — is ordinarily not viewed as a lapse in professional representation’ ”) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); see generally Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 (actions or omissions by counsel that “might be considered sound trial strategy” do not constitute ineffective assistance) (citations omitted); but see Pavel v. Hollins, 261 F.3d 210 (…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Marshall v. Russell
See, e.g., Brown v. Bryan Cnty. , 219 F.3d 450 , 462 (5th Cir. 2000) (affirming denial of motion for judgment as a matter of law on failure to train claim where evidence showed the County provided no training to its officers and had no policies regarding the supervision of junior officers), reh'g denied , 235 F.3d 944 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1734 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. McLaughlin
See, e.g., United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 198 (2d Cir.2000) (allowing hearsay statement when independent evidence connected declarant’s statement about future act with non-declarant’s subsequent activities), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); United States v. Delvecchio, 816 F.2d 859, 862-63 (2d Cir.1987) (precluding admission where there was no independent corroborative evidence).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jones
“A defendant who seeks reversal of his conviction on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence bears a heavy burden.” United States v. Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 382 ; see, e.g., United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 200 (2d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Luke Jones
“A defendant who seeks reversal of his conviction on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence bears a heavy burden.” United States v. Concepcion, 983 F.2d at 382 ; see, e.g., United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 200 (2d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Lionel Reifler, Glenn B. Laken, John M. Black, Jr.
“In challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction, a defendant bears a heavy burden.” United States v. Hamilton, 334 F.3d 170, 179 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 985 , 124 S.Ct. 502 , 157 L.Ed.2d 378 (2003); see, e.g., United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 200 (2d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); United States v. Autuori, 212 F.3d 105, 114 (2d Cir.2000).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michael Hamilton and Nicola Messere, Also Known as Supercop
See, e.g., United States v. Best, 219 F.3d 192, 200 (2d Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001); United States v. Autuori, 212 F.3d 105, 114 (2d Cir.2000).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
ICCO Design/Build, Inc. v. Sunbrite Cleaners, Inc. (In Re Sunbrite Cleaners, Inc.)
“After a debtor’s reorganization plan has been confirmed, the debtor’s estate, and thus bankruptcy jurisdiction, ceases to exist, other than for matters pertaining to the implementation or execution of the plan.” In re Craig’s Stores of Texas, Inc., 266 F.3d 388, 390 (5th Cir. 2001); Presidential Gardens Assocs., 175 F.3d at 142 (jurisdiction “does not normally survive the dismissal of the underlying bankruptcy proceeding”); In re Fairfield Cmtys., Inc., 142 F.3d 1093 , 1095 (8th Cir. 1998); In re Johns-Manville Corp., 7 F.3d at 34 ; see also Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Danzig, 217…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
LensCrafters, Inc. v. Sundquist
Compare In re SDDS, Inc., 225 F.3d 970, 972-73 (8th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1007 , 121 S.Ct. 1733 , 149 L.Ed.2d 658 (2001) (finding that voluntary appearance and defense on the merits does constitute waiver) and Hill v. Blind Indus, and Servs. of Maryland, 179 F.3d 754, 759 (9th Cir.1999), as amended on denial of reh’g, 201 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir.1999) (same) -with Montgomery v. Maryland, 266 F.3d 334, 338 (4th Cir.2001) (finding that "circuit precedent allows the Eleventh Amendment to be raised for the first *760 time on appeal, regardless of whether the case was resolved on the plead…
In re Sherrills
No. 00-8691.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 30, 2001.
Published
Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed informa pauperis denied, and petition for writ of mandamus dismissed See this Court’s Rule 39.8.