green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.2 score
“district courts are authorized to impose a period of supervised release as a consequence of probation revocation.”
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. TONY McCULLOUGH
district courts are authorized to impose a period of supervised release as a consequence of probation revocation.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Rose
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 832 , 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Elpidio G. Santos, Also Known as Indio, and Victor Alejo, Juan Garcia
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 832 , 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Marcos Loinas Anderson, A/K/A Marcos Loynas Anderson, A/K/A T. Torrero, A/K/A Samuel Perez, United States of America v. Maria Berdecia, A/K/A Maria C. Depalacio, A/K/A Consuela, United States of America v. Norberto Garces, A/K/A Victorio Torres, Piro, United States of America v. Gabriel Ruperto Davis-Munoz, A/K/A Gabriel Davis, Gabelin, United States of America v. Alfredo Brathwaite, A/K/A Sealy, Alfredo West, Freddie, United States of America v. Beverly Elaine Nelson, A/K/A Beverly M. Nelson, United States of America v. Robert Luis Castillo, A/K/A Robert Luis Castillo-Garrido, United States of America v. Antonio Scott, A/K/A Tony Anderson, Tony, United States of America v. Leonard Lancelot Shand, A/K/A Steve, United States of America v. Vielka Dudley, A/K/A Vielka Dudley-Maynard, Vielka Davis, Benky, United States of America v. Antonio Scott, A/K/A Tony Anderson, Tony, United States of America v. Michael Jonathan Booze, United States of America v. Thomas Timothy Booze, A/K/A Timmy, United States of America v. Gregory Orlander Booze
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674-76 (2d Cir.1993), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Sims, 975 F.2d 1225, 1233 (6th Cir.1992), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 1315 , 122 L.Ed.2d 702 (1993); United States v. Moore, 958 F.2d 310, 312-14 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Hamilton, 953 F.2d 1344, 1345-46 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 240 , 121 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992); United States v. Privette, 947 F.2d 1259, 1262-63 (5th Cir.1991), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 1279 , 117 L.Ed.2d 505 (1992); United …
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ganci
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 670-71 (2d Cir.) (vacating concurrent narcotics conspiracy sentence and remanding for resentencing after combining narcotics conspiracy count with CCE count), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Benevento, 836 F.2d 60, 73 (2d Cir.1987) (same), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1043 , 108 S.Ct. 2035 , 100 L.Ed.2d 620 (1988); United States v. Amen, 831 F.2d 373, 383-84 (2d Cir.1987) (combining narcotics conspiracy conviction into CCE conviction for sentencing), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1021 , 108 S.Ct. 1573 , 99 L.Ed…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ganci
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 670-71 (2d Cir.) (vacating concurrent narcotics conspiracy sentence and remanding for resentencing after combining narcotics conspiracy count with CCE count), cert. denied , — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Benevento, 836 F.2d 60, 73 (2d Cir.1987) (same), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1043 , 108 S.Ct. 2035 , 100 L.Ed.2d 620 (1988); United States v. Amen, 831 F.2d 373, 383-84 (2d Cir.1987) (combining narcotics conspiracy conviction into CCE conviction for sentencing), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1021 , 108 S.Ct. 1573 , 99 L.Ed.2…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Anderson
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674-76 (2d Cir.1993), cert., denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Sims, 975 F.2d 1225, 1233 (6th Cir.1992), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 1315 , 122 L.Ed.2d 702 (1993); United States v. Moore, 958 F.2d 310, 312-14 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Hamilton, 953 F.2d 1344, 1345-46 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 240 , 121 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992); United States v. Privette, 947 F.2d 1259, 1262-63 (5th Cir.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1279 , 117 L.Ed.2d 505 (1992); United States v. Fon…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John Cappas
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Luskin, 926 F.2d 372, 376-77 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 68 , 116 L.Ed.2d 43 (1991); United States v. Privette, 947 F.2d 1259, 1262-63 (5th Cir.1991), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1279 , 117 L.Ed.2d 505 (1992); United States v. Pineda-Ortuno, 952 F.2d 98, 104-105 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1990 , 118 L.Ed.2d 587 (1992); United States v. Henry, 878 F.2d 937, 942-45 (6th Cir.1989); United States v. Nabors, 901 F.2d 13…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Clarence Jones
The standard applicable to sufficiency challenges has been oft repeated: viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, the defendant must demonstrate that no “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); see United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 672 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ronald Taylor (92-6548) and Michael Nash (92-6549)
See United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Parra, 2 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 639 , 126 L.Ed.2d 597 (1993); United States v. Moore, 958 F.2d 310 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Hamilton, 953 F.2d 1344, 1346 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 240 , 121 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992); United States v. Privette, 947 F.2d 1259 (5th Cir.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1279 , 117 L.Ed.2d 505 (1992); United States v. Henning, 906 F.2d 1392 (10th Cir.1990), c…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Handy v. State
See also United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674 (2nd Cir.) (concluding “that congress considered the appropriate unit of prosecution to be the underlying drug-trafficking offense, not the separate firearms”), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 832 , 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993)(subsequent history omitted); United States v. Sims, 975 F.2d 1225, 1236 (6th Cir.1992) (noting that the defendant could only be convicted and sentenced for one violation of the statute), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 932 , 113 S.Ct. 1315 , 122 L.Ed.2d 702 (1993)(subsequent history omitted); United States v. Moore, 958 F.…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. William G. Curtis and Jamell L. Rouson
In that line of eases, the courts focused on the imposition of multiple § 924(c)(1) convictions for each gun attributable to a defendant, even if the gun was “carried or ‘used’ in the same place and at the same time as other targeted guns.” United States v. Anderson, 59 F.3d 1323, 1328-29 (D.C.Cir.1995) (en bane); see also United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 674-75 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 832 , 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Elpidio G. Santos, Also Known as Indio, and Victor Alejo, Juan Garcia
See, e.g., United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 672 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Tony McCullough
See also United States v. Hobbs, 981 F.2d 1198, 1199 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, -U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 69 (1993) ("District courts are authorized to impose a period of supervised release as a consequence of probation revocation.”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jane L. Wheel v. Stuart Robinson, Superintendent of Chittenden County Correctional Center
The standard of review of a sufficiency claim by a federal habeas court is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319 , 99 S.Ct. at 2789 ; see also United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 672 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 103 , 126 L.Ed.2d 70 (1993); United States v. Pitre, 960 F.2d 1112, 1120 (2d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Curtis Taylor
See Meggett, 875 F.2d at 25 (heroin involved in each drug transaction “originated from or passed through” apartment where gun was found); Medina, 944 F.2d at 66-67 (drug transaction for which defendant was arrested took place in apartment where gun was located); Alvarado, 882 F.2d at 647-48 (cocaine sold to confidential informant in apartment where guns were found); see also United States v. Lindsay, 985 F.2d 666, 672 (2d Cir.) (affirming § 924(c)(1) conviction where there was testimony that defendant conducted his drug-trafficking business from home where firearms were found and that def…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Starnes
v.
Kerby, Warden
v.
Kerby, Warden
92-8629.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 1993.
Starnes
v.
Kerby, Warden.
No. 92-8629.
Supreme Court of United States.
October 4, 1993.
1
Appeal from the C. A. 10th Cir.
2
Certiorari denied. Reported below: 986 F. 2d 1429.