green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
10.9 score
G Cite
cited 8× by 4 distinct cases ·
"Tucker II"
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hyman
(2×)
See United States v. Hermanek , 289 F. 3d 1076 , 1096 (9th Cir. 2002) (criticizing proponent's reasoning as "circular, [and] subjective," where the agent "appear[ed] at times to have interpreted cryptic language as referring to cocaine simply because he believed [the defendants] to be cocaine traffickers"), cert. denied , 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S.Ct. 1336 , 154 L.Ed. 2d 1081 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see"
STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ELEX HYMAN(10-11-2077, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
(2×)
See United States v. Hermanek, 289 F.3d 1076, 1093-97 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S. Ct. 1336 , 154 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Cooley
See United States v. Romm, 455 F.3d 990, 998 (9th Cir.2006), ce rt. denied, 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S.Ct. 1335 , 154 L.Ed.2d 1082 (2003), and United States v. Tucker, 305 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir.2002), Cert.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. McCaskill
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 314 F.3d 1216, 1221 (10th Cir.2003) (explaining that unless “objections involve non-perfunetory specific allegations of factual inaccuracy, no controverted matter exists, and the district court’s fact-finding obligation under Rule 32 ... is not implicated”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S.Ct. 1338 , 154 L.Ed.2d 1083 (2003); see also United States v. Pitts, No. 96-2263, 1998 WL 165154 , at *2 (6th Cir. Apr. 3, 1998) (explaining that a defendant who fails to object to the district court’s lack of a sufficien…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Mobley
See Callahan, 77 Wash.2d at 29 , 459 P.2d 400 . ¶ 15 The level of proof necessary to show knowing possession of child pornography where images have been viewed on the internet, stored on a hard drive, and then deleted has been analyzed in United States v. Tucker, 305 F.3d 1193, 1204 (10th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S.Ct. 1335 , 154 L.Ed.2d 1082 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Mobley
See Callahan, 77 Wn.2d at 29 . ¶15 The level of proof necessary to show knowing possession of child pornography where images have been viewed on the internet, stored on a hard drive, and then deleted has been analyzed in United States v. Tucker, 305 F.3d 1193, 1204 (10th Cir. 2002), cert, denied, 537 U.S. 1223 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ronald Miltier
To satisfy the "knowing" element under these provisions, the government must present sufficient evidence such that a rational juror could find that the defendant had knowledge of "the sexually explicit nature of the materials as well as ... the involvement of minors in the materials' production...." United States v. Matthews , 209 F.3d 338 , 351 (4th Cir. 2000) (interpreting United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. , 513 U.S. 64 78, 115 S.Ct. 464 , 130 L.Ed.2d 372 (1994) ); see also United States v. Tucker , 305 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2002), cert. denied , 537 U.S. 1223 , 123 S.Ct. 1335 , 154 L.E…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Goldman
v.
United States
v.
United States
02-8568.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 24, 2003.
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (2) · D. South Dakota (1)
GOLDMAN
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 02-8568.
Supreme Court of United States.
February 24, 2003.
1
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT.
2
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.