green
Positive treatment
13.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 2014 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2014
2020
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Lipsitz v. State
See Wrotten v. New York , 560 U.S. 959 , 959, 130 S.Ct. 2520 , 2520, 177 L.Ed.2d 316 (2010) (explaining that whether the use of two-way video transmission violated a defendant's rights was an important question that was "not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig ").
discussed
Cited "see"
LIPSITZ (RYAN) VS. STATE
See Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959, 959 (2010) (explaining that whether the use of two-way video transmission violated a defendant's rights was an important question that was "not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig").
discussed
Cited "see"
LIPSITZ (RYAN) VS. STATE
(2×)
See Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959, 959 (2010) (explaining that whether the use of two-way video transmission violated a defendant's rights was an important question that was "not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig").
cited
Cited "see"
In the Interest of E. T., a Child
See Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959 ( 130 SCt 2520 , 177 LEd2d 316 ) (2010) (this issue was “not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836” (2010), J.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Robert F.
Further, in the absence of an explicit prohibition, the trial court has the discretion to utilize live video testimony pursuant to its inherent power to employ innovative procedures where “necessary to carry into effect the powers and jurisdiction possessed by it” (Judiciary Law § 2-b [3]; see People v Wrotten, 14 NY3d 33, 37-38 [2009], cert denied 560 US 959 [2010]).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Robert F.
Further, in the absence of an explicit prohibition, the trial court has the discretion to utilize live video testimony pursuant to its inherent power to employ innovative procedures where “necessary to carry into effect the powers and jurisdiction possessed by it” (Judiciary Law § 2-b [3]; see People v Wrotten, 14 NY3d 33, 37-38 [2009], cert denied 560 US 959 [2010]).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Tennessee v. Tony Banks and Tyrone Banks
See State v. Rogerson, 855 N.W.2d 495, 500 (Iowa 2014); see also Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959, 959 (2010) (Sotomayor, J., respecting denial of petition for writ of certiorari) (noting the “strikingly different context” of testimony received via one-way, closed-circuit television and two-way videoconferencing and stating that the question of and standards for the use of two-way videoconferencing testimony in a criminal defendant’s trial “is not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cody Bragg v. State of Alabama
See State v. Rogerson, 855 N.W.2d 495 , 499- 500 (Iowa 2014); see also Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959, 959 , 130 S.Ct. 2520 , 177 L.Ed.2d 316 (2010) (Sotomayor, J., respecting denial of petition for writ of certiorari) (noting that the question of and standards for the use of two-way video testimony in a petitioner's trial 'is not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig').
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Hon kemp/davis
See State v. Rogerson, 855 N.W.2d 495, 499-500 (Iowa 2014); see also Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959 , 959 (2010) (Sotomayor, J., respecting denial of petition for writ of certiorari) (noting that the question of and standards for the use of two-way video testimony in a petitioner’s trial “is not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State ex rel. Montgomery v. Kemp ex rel. County of Maricopa
See State v. Rogerson, 855 N.W.2d 495, 499-500 (Iowa 2014); see also Wrotten v. New York, 560 U.S. 959 , 959, 130 S.Ct. 2520 , 177 L.Ed.2d 316 (2010) (Sotomayor, J., respecting denial of petition for writ of certiorari) (noting that the question of and standards for the use of two-way video testimony in a petitioner’s trial “is not obviously answered by Maryland v. Craig ”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kim N. Pounds
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 09-10633.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 7, 2010.
177 L. Ed. 2d 314
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Same case below, 364 Fed. Appx. 362.