green
Positive treatment
3.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 2004 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2004
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Moore v. Schlichting
This doctrine has been extended to apply in the prison disciplinary context 8 where the “defect complained of by [plaintiff] would, if established, necessarily imply the 9 invalidity of the deprivation of his good-time credits[,]” Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 , 646 10 (1997); Nonnette v. Small, 316 F.3d 872, 875 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1218 11 (2004), and if the restoration of those credits “necessarily” would “affect the duration of time to 12 be served.” Muhammed v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 754 (2004) (per curiam); see also Nettles v. 13 Grounds, 830 F.3d 922 , 92…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Elashi
See Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 219 F.Supp.2d 57, 67 (D.D.C.2002) (holding the IEEPA does not limit blocking authority to the existence of a legally enforceable interest), 26 aff'd, 333 F.3d 156 (D.C.Cir.2003), ce rt. denied, 540 U.S. 1218, 124 S.Ct. 1506 , 158 L.Ed.2d 153 (2004); Global Relief Found., Inc. v. O’Neill, 315 F.3d 748, 753 (7th Cir.2002) (“[T]he focus must be on how assets could be controlled and used, not on bare legal ownership.”), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1003 , 124 S.Ct. 531 , 157 L.Ed.2d 408 (2003); Paradissiotis v. Rubin, 171 F.3d 983 , 988 (5th Cir.…
discussed
Cited "see"
Webman v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
(2×)
See Holy Land Found. for Relief & Dev. v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 156, 167 (D.C.Cir.2003) ("[W]e have held that without doubt `the portion [of RFRA] applicable to the federal government . . . survived the Supreme Court's decision striking down the statute as applied to the States.'") (quoting Henderson v. Kennedy, 265 F.3d 1072, 1073 (D.C.Cir.2001)), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1218 , 124 S.Ct. 1506 , 158 L.Ed.2d 153 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
Gutierrez v. Dretke
(2×)
See Harris v. Cockrell, 313 F.3d 238, 246 (5th Cir.2002) (the introduction of evidence of extraneous offenses, even those of which the defendant has been acquitted, does not violate due process and there is no constitutional requirement extraneous offenses offered at the punishment phase of a capital trial be proven beyond a reasonable doubt), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1218 , 124 S.Ct. 1503 , 158 L.Ed.2d 152 (2004); Vega v. Johnson, 149 F.3d 354, 359 (5th Cir.1998) (extraneous offenses offered at the punishment phase of a capital trial need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and may be admit…
discussed
Cited "see"
Prieto v. Dretke
(2×)
See Harris v. Cockrell, 313 F.3d 238, 244 (5th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1218 , 124 S.Ct. 1503 , 158 L.Ed.2d 152 (2004), (holding failure to present double-edged evidence regarding petitioner’s propensity for future violence did not prejudice petitioner because of overwhelming evidence of violence in petitioner’s background); Johnson v. Cockrell, 306 F.3d at 251 (holding petitioner was not prejudiced by the failure of his trial counsel to present evidence of petitioner’s history of childhood abuse where such testimony would have impugned the credibility of petitioner’s relative…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Doss v. Crosby
(2×)
See also Nonnette v. Small, 316 F.3d 872, 876-878 (9th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1218 , 124 S.Ct. 1503 , 158 L.Ed.2d 152 (2004) (because no case or controversy remained for released inmate and habeas petition would be moot under Spencer, Heck did not bar § 1983 suit) (citations and footnote omitted).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Harris
v.
Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
v.
Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
No. 02-1433.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 1, 2004.
Cited by 20 opinions | Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.