Madrid v. United States, 539 U.S. 951 (2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Madrid v. United States, 539 U.S. 951 (2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events (23 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Timothy St. Fleur v. City of Fort Lauderdale (ca11, 2005-08-29)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Timothy St. Fleur v. City of Fort Lauderdale
11th Cir. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Whitesell, 314 F.3d 1251, 1256 (11th Cir.2002) (stating that this Court refuses to consider issues raised for the first time in a reply brief), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 951 , 123 S.Ct. 2628 , 156 L.Ed.2d 643 (2003). 5 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Burton v. Dunn (DEATH PENALTY)
M.D. Ala. · 2019 · signal: see also · confidence low
Ga. 2012) (determining motion to dismiss filed after answer could be construed as a motion for judgment on the pleadings). (citation omitted); see also United States v. Whitesell, 314 F.3d 1251, 1256 (11th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 951 . . . (2003); United States v. Dicter, 198 F.3d 1284, 1289 (11th Cir. 1999); United States v. Martinez, 83 F.3d 371 , 377 n.6 (11th Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Moulton v. DeSue
M.D. Fla. · 2012 · signal: see also · confidence low
United States v. Coy, 19 F.3d 629 , 632 n. 7 (11th Cir.1994) (citation omitted); see also United States v. Whitesell, 314 F.3d 1251, 1256 (11th Cir.2002) (Court need not address issue raised for first time in reply brief), cert. denied, 539 U.S. 951 , 123 S.Ct. 2628 , 156 L.Ed.2d 643 (2003); United States v. Dicter, 198 F.3d 1284, 1289 (11th Cir.1999) (issue raised for first time in reply brief waived); United States v. Martinez, 83 F.3d 371 , 377 n. 6 (11th Cir.1996) (declining to consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Ted Herring v. Secretary, Department of Correction (2×)
11th Cir. · 2005 · signal: see also · confidence low
In his reply brief, however, Herring argues his Clemons claim is not procedurally barred because he did present his Clemons argument to the Florida Supreme Court during proceedings on his second 3.850 motion and the Florida Supreme Court reached the merits of his claim. 1 As we repeatedly have admonished, “[arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief are not properly before a reviewing court.” United States v. Coy, 19 F.3d 629 , 632 n. 7 (11th Cir.1994) (citation omitted); see also United States v. Whitesell, 314 F.3d 1251, 1256 (11th Cir.2002) (Court need not address issue raised…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Madrid
v.
United States
02-10737.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 23, 2003.
539 U.S. 951
Published

539 U.S. 951

Madrid
v.
United States.

No. 02-10737.

Supreme Court of United States.

June 23, 2003.

1

Appeal from the C. A. 9th Cir.

2

Certiorari denied. Reported below: 56 Fed. Appx. 423.