green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.1 score
“powell ii”
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 "see"
Woods v. Adams
See Arredondo v. Ortiz, 365 F.3d at 783 (citing Williams v. Borg, 139 F.3d 737, 741 (9th Cir.1998) [rejecting a defendant’s attempt to “elevate to a constitutional level the distinction between cross-examination on collateral and non-collateral matters”]), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 892 , 125 S.Ct. 102 , 160 L.Ed.2d 156 (2004).
cited
Cited "see"
Juniper v. Com.
See Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 107 , 138, 590 S.E.2d 537 , 556, cert. denied, 543 U.S. 892 , 125 S.Ct. 86 , 160 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
SINTAY v. Martel
Banks I, 536 U.S. at 272 , 122 S.Ct. at 2151 ; Bohlen, 510 U.S. at 389 , 114 S.Ct. at 953 ; see also Arredondo v. Ortiz, 365 F.3d 778, 781-82 (9th Cir.) ("[A]t a minimum Teague should be identified as an issue (indeed, the first issue). . ., the new rule of constitutional law that falls within its proscription should be articulated, the reasons why such a rule would not have been compelled by existing precedent should be explained with particular reference to the appropriate universe of precedent, and an argument should be made why the rule contended for is not within one of Teague 's exceptio…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sintay v. Martel
Banks I, 536 U.S. at 272 , 122 S.Ct. at 2151 ; Bohlen, 510 U.S. at 389 , 114 S.Ct. at 953 ; see also Arredondo v. Ortiz, 365 F.3d 778, 781-82 (9th Cir.) (“[A]t a minimum Teague should be identified as an issue (indeed, the first issue) ..., the new rule of constitutional law that falls within its proscription should be articulated, the reasons why such a rule would not have been compelled by existing precedent should be explained with particular reference to the appropriate universe of precedent, and an argument should be made why the rule contended for is not within one of Teague’s except…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Prieto v. Com.
Rules 5:17(c)(4) and 5:27; see also Powell v. Commonwealth, 267 Va. 107, 135 , 590 S.E.2d 537, 554 , cert. denied, 543 U.S. 892 , 125 S.Ct. 86 , 160 L.Ed.2d 157 (2004).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Daniels
v.
United States
v.
United States
04-5292.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 2004.
Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Virginia (1)
DANIELS
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 04-5292.
Supreme Court of United States.
October 4, 2004.
1
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 95 Fed. Appx. 228.