green
Positive treatment
9.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Serna v. Cooksey
See United States v. Lang, 364 F.3d 1210, 1216 (10th Cir. 2004) (noting circuit precedent holding that a recusal issue is not preserved for review absent timely objection in the district court pursuant to § 455), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108 (2005). 4 It is unclear which of two PFRDs the Sernas reference.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Brinson
See United States v. Lang, 364 F.3d 1210, 1222 (10th Cir.2004), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 986 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2005).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Hill
See United States v. Lang, 364 F.3d 1210, 1223-24 (10th Cir.2004) (discussing this theory), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 986 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2005).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Johnson
See United States v. Lang, 364 F.3d 1210, 1216 (10th Cir.2004) (declining to resolve the intra-circuit conflict and holding that an appellate argument involving the district judge’s failure to recuse sua sponte would fail even under the plain-error standard), vacated on other grounds, Lang v. United States, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 986 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2005) (mem.).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Dyer
(2×)
See United States v. Todd, 100 F. App'x 248, 250 (5th Cir. 2004), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108 (2005) (noting that "trafficking" ordinarily means "both buying and selling commodities for money and exchanging commodities by barter"); United States v. Parmelee, 319 F.3d 583, 594 (3d Cir. 2003) (observing that "trafficking" under § 2G2.2 includes bartering); United States v. Johnson, 221 F.3d 83, 98 (2d Cir. 2000) (same); United States v. Horn, 187 F.3d 781, 791 (8th Cir. 1999) ("Section 2G2.2 and the cross reference in § 2G2.4(c)(2) apply when the offense involved the exchange or ba…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jackson
See United States v. Underwood, 364 F.3d 956 , 966-967 (8th Cir. 2004), vacated on other grounds by Carpenter v. United States, 543 U.S. 1108 (2005); United States v. White, 240 F.3d 127, 133 (2d Cir. 2001); United States 17 v. Kakatin, 214 F.3d 1049, 1051 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Freyre-Lazaro, 3 F.3d 1496, 1507 (11th Cir. 1993); United States v. Scott, 987 F.2d 261, 266 (5th Cir. 1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Anthony Jackson
See United States v. Underwood, 364 F.3d 956 , 966-967 (8th Cir.2004), vacated on other grounds by Carpenter v. United States, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 1037 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1032 (2005); United States v. White, 240 F.3d 127, 133 (2d Cir.2001); United States v. Kakatin, 214 F.3d 1049, 1051 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Freyre-Lazaro, 3 F.3d 1496, 1507 (11th Cir.1993); United States v. Scott, 987 F.2d 261, 266 (5th Cir.1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Acosta
Compare Jones v. National American University, 608 F3d 1039, 1045 (8th Cir 2010) (rejecting a hearsay challenge under the federal counterpart to OEC 801(4)(b)(A) on the ground that the testimony “was sufficient evidence for a jury to find that the exhibit was [the party opponent’s] state- ment”), and U.S. v. Tann, 425 F Supp 2d 26, 38 (DDC 2006), aff’d, 532 F3d 868 (DC Cir), cert den, 555 US 1088 (2008) 158 State v. Acosta (concluding that “the Government has met its burden under Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b) to establish that a reason- able juror could conclude that the e-mails in…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Missouri, ex rel, Chris Koster, Attorney General v. Mark Bailey
See, e.g., U.S. v. Vondette, 352 F.3d 772 , 775 (2d Cir.2003) (ERISA’s anti-alienation provisions “do not purport to apply to IRAs”), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 1010 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1035 (2005); Goldblatt v. F.D.I.C., 105 F,3d 1325, 1329 (9th Cir.1997) (“29 U.S.C. § 1051(6) specifically exempts pension plans that qualify.as IRAs under 26 U.S.C. ■§ 408 from ERISA’s anti-alienation requirement”) (citing Patterson, 504 U.S. at 762-63 , 112 S.Ct. 2242 ); VFS Fin., Inc. v. Elias-Savion-Fox LLC, 73 F.Supp.3d 329, 341 (S.D.N.Y.2014) (anti-alienation provision is…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Chavis Douglas
(2×)
See United States v. Knight, 266 F.3d 203, 206-07 (3d Cir.2001); see also United States v. Johnson, 103 Fed.Appx. 866, 874 (6th Cir.2004), vacated and remanded following Booker, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 1044 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1033 (2005); United States v. Warren, 361 F.3d 1055, 1059 (8th Cir.2004).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jordan, Larry
See, e.g., United States v. Mayes, 370 F.3d 703, 711 (7th Cir. 2004), vacated on other grounds by Jordan v. United States, 543 U.S. 1107 (2005), and Clayton v. United States, 543 U.S. 1108 (2005); United States v. Guy, 174 F.3d 859, 861-62 (7th Cir. 1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Larry Jordan
See, e.g., United States v. Mayes, 370 F.3d 703, 711 (7th Cir.2004), vacated on other grounds by Jordan v. United States, 543 U.S. 1107 , 125 S.Ct. 987 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1030 (2005), and Clayton v. United States, 543 U.S. 1108, 125 S.Ct. 1038 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1030 (2005); United States v. Guy, 174 F.3d 859, 861-62 (7th Cir.1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Garza
See United States v. Newton, 891 F.2d 944, 947 (1st Cir.1989) (finding sufficient circumstantial evidence to support admission of a document as a party admission where the defendant denied being the author of the document); see also United States v. Lang, 364 F.3d 1210, 1222-23 (10th Cir. 2004) (“the government need only prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [the defendant] made the statements in question”), vacated, 543 U.S. 1108 , 125 S.Ct. 986 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1034 , reinstated 405 F.3d 1060, 1061 (10th Cir.2005).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Gillian
v.
United States
v.
United States
04-6186.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 24, 2005.
Published
GILLIAN
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 04-6186.
Supreme Court of United States.
January 24, 2005.
1
C. A. 4th Cir. Reported below: 99 Fed. Appx. 477; Motions of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted, judgments vacated, and cases remanded for further consideration in light of United States v. Booker, ante, p. 220.