green
Positive treatment
3.9 score
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bossany
See United States v. Diaz, 296 F.3d 680, 683-85 (8th Cir.2002) (en banc), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 & 1095, 123 S.Ct. 43 & 709, 154 L.Ed.2d 247 & 645 (2002); United States v. Gillon, 348 F.3d 755, 758 (8th Cir.2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 968 , 124 S.Ct. 1735 , 158 L.Ed.2d 415 (2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hopkins
“One who dials 911 from a private phone is traceable, and does place credibility at risk in a way that an unidentifiable caller from a public phone does not.” State v. Gomez, 198 Ariz. 61, 64 , 6 P.3d 765 (Ct. App. 2000); see generally United States v. Nelson, 284 F.3d 472, 482-83 (3d Cir.) (caller not anonymous when he calls private police number known only to family members and informants and requests a certain officer but refuses to give his name), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 (4th ed. 2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Hopkins
"One who dials 911 from a private phone is traceable, and does place credibility at risk in a way that an unidentifiable caller from a public phone does not." State v. Gomez, 198 Ariz. 61, 64 , 6 P.3d 765 (Ariz.Ct.App.2000); see generally United States v. Nelson, 284 F.3d 472, 482-83 (3rd Cir.2002) (caller not anonymous when he calls private police number known only to family members and informants and requests a certain officer but refuses to give his name). cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 , 123 S.Ct. 50 , 154 L.Ed.2d 245 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lohr v. United States
See United States v. Sherman, 262 F.3d 784 , 789-93 (8th Cir.2001) reh’g granted in part & opinion vacated in part, (Oct. 9, 2001), opinion reinstated sub. nom., United States v. Diaz, 296 F.3d 680, 685 (8th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 , 123 S.Ct. 43 , 154 L.Ed.2d 247 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ingmar Eloy Gillon
See United States v. Diaz, 296 F.3d 680, 684-85 (8th Cir.2002) (en banc), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 , 123 S.Ct. 43 , 154 L.Ed.2d 247 (2002) and 537 U.S. 1095 , 123 S.Ct. 709 , 154 L.Ed.2d 645 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Heldeman
See also United States v. Sherman, 262 F.3d 784 , 795 (8th Cir.2001) (subjecting § 853(a)(2) forfeiture to excessive fines analysis), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 940 , 123 S.Ct. 43 , 154 L.Ed.2d 247 (2002), and cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1095 , 123 S.Ct. 709 , 154 L.Ed.2d 645 (2002); United States v. Dieter, 198 F.3d 1284 , 1292 (11th Cir.1999) (same), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 828 , 121 S.Ct. 77 , 148 L.Ed.2d 40 (2000).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Burke
v.
United States
v.
United States
02-6113.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 7, 2002.
Published
BURKE
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 02-6113.
Supreme Court of United States.
October 7, 2002.
1
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT.
2
C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 257 F. 3d 1321.