green
Positive treatment
12.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Jason Roberts
Sept. 28, 2018) (unpub. mem.) [https://perma.cc/6M44-KYVH]; see United States v. Fell, 571 F.3d 264, 274 (2d Cir. 2009) (mem.) (Raggi, J., concurring) (“Vermont . . . does not currently use the death penalty.”), denying reh’g en banc 531 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 1031 (2010); see also 13 V.S.A. § 2303 (mentioning only “imprisonment” as punishment for first-degree and second-degree murder).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Goberdhan
(5×)
Although this case differs from those in which an anonymous jury was utilized for trial in the prosecution of gang-related crimes ( see People v Flores , 153 AD3d at 188 ; see also United States v Thai , 29 F3d 785, 800-801 [2d Cir 1994], cert denied 513 US 977 [1994), organized crime ( see United States v Vario , 943 F2d 236, 241 [2d Cir 1991], cert denied 502 US 1036 [1992]) and acts of terrorism ( see United States v Stewart , 590 F3d 93, 124-125 [2d Cir 2009], cert denied 559 US 1031 [2010]; United States v Pugh , 150 F Supp 3d 218, 223 [ED NY 2015]), that distinction is of no moment.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Terebesi v. Torresso
And while ʺwe have jurisdiction to determine whether the issue is materialʺ to the legal issues properly before us, we may not review ʺwhether it is genuine.ʺ Bolmer v. Oliveira, 594 F.3d 134 , 140‐41 (2d Cir. 2010) (emphasis in original); see also Droz v. McCadden, 580 F.3d 106, 108 (2d Cir. 2009) (per curiam) (ʺʹ[W]e may not review whether a dispute of fact identified by the district court is truly genuine.ʹʺ (quoting Escalera, 361 F.3d at 743 )), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 1031 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Terebesi v. Torreso
(2×)
And while “we have jurisdiction to determine whether the issue is material” to the legal issues properly before us, we may not review “whether it is genuine.” Bolmer v. Oliveira, 594 F.3d 134, 140-41 (2d Cir.2010) (emphasis in original); see also Droz v. McCadden, 580 F.3d 106, 108 (2d Cir.2009) (per curiam) (“ ‘[W]e may not review whether a dispute of fact identified by the district court is truly genuine.’ ” (quoting Escalera, 361 F.3d at 743 )), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 1031 , 130 S.Ct. 1914 , 176 L.Ed.2d 403 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Matthews
(2×)
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ; see also Brown v. Greene, 577 F.3d 107, 110 (2d Cir.2009), cert. denied, Brown v. Rock, 559 U.S. 1031 , 130 S.Ct. 1881 , 176 L.Ed.2d 403 (2010). “[A] ‘reasonable probability’ of a different result is a ‘probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.’ ” Wilson v. Mazzuca, 570 F.3d 490, 502 (2d Cir.2009) (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ). 1.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Angela Montgomery
v.
Wyeth, fka American Home Products Corporation
v.
Wyeth, fka American Home Products Corporation
No. 09-856.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 22, 2010.
176 L. Ed. 2d 403
Consideration, Took.
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied. The
Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.Same case below, 580 F.3d 455.