green
Positive treatment
4.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Patrick
See United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275, 276 (3d Cir.1977) (although the government should maintain such notes, there is no prejudice absent bad faith in failing to do so), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Patrick
See United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275, 276 (3d Cir.1977) (although the government should maintain such notes, there is no prejudice absent bad faith in failing to do so), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. George Munson
The statement was in furtherance of the conspiracy because it “identified a fellow conspirator as a source of [cocaine], and was made for the purpose of inducing continued participation in the conspiracy.” United States v. Anderson, 642 F.2d 281, 285 (9th Cir.1981); see United States v. Lambros, 564 F.2d 26, 30 (8th Cir.1977) (“statements of a coconspirator identifying a fellow coconspirator as his source of narcotics are statements made in furtherance of the conspiracy”), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Graham
See Lipinski v. New York, 557 F.2d 289, 293 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S. Ct. 1262 , 55 L.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jack L. Marvin
See United States v. Lambros, 564 F.2d 26, 28 (8th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael S. Williams, United States of America v. Hilton L. Smith, Jr., United States of America v. Deffanie J. Morgan, United States of America v. Norman L. Williams, United States of America v. James Michael Ervin
See United States v. Harris, 560 F.2d 148 (3d Cir.) (per curiam), Cert. denied, 434 U.S. 986 , 97 S.Ct. 1558 , 51 L.Ed.2d 779 (1977), Explained further in United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275 (3d Cir. 1977) (per curiam), Cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978); United States v. Harris, 543 F.2d 1247 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Harrison, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 524 F.2d 421 (1975) 8 Defense counsel was attempting to develop the possibility that Ms. Flack, not Ms. Morgan, was the seller of narcotics and that Ms. Flack's relationship with Officers Clark and Craven…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Williams
See United States v. Harris, 560 F.2d 148 (3d Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 986 , 97 S.Ct. 1558 , 51 L.Ed.2d 779 (1977), explained further in United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275 (3d Cir. 1977) (per curiam), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978); United States v. Harris, 543 F.2d 1247 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Harrison, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 524 F.2d 421 (1975). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Stanley Bell
United States v. Brown, 72 F.3d 96, 97 (8th Cir.1995) (per curiam) (“Because Brown’s section 924(c)(1) conviction is based on his section 841(a)(1) drug trafficking offense, which involved an activity that substantially affected interstate commerce, we reject Brown’s Lopez challenge.”) (internal punctuation omitted), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 2581 , 135 L.Ed.2d 1095 (1996); see also United States v. McMillian, 535 F.2d 1035 , 1037 n. 1 (8th Cir.1976) (“We ... find the defendants’ argument that 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e) is not within the scope of Congress’ power to regulate …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Corey D. Brown
United States v. Owens, 996 F.2d 59, 61 (5th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (10th Amendment challenge); United States v. Dumas, 934 F.2d 1387, 1390 (6th Cir.1990) (same), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1006 , 112 S.Ct. 641 , 116 L.Ed.2d 658 (1991); see also United States v. McMillian, 535 F.2d 1035 , 1037 n. 1 (8th Cir.1976) (rejecting argument that § 924(c) not within scope of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Giampa
In Ammar , the Third Circuit stated: “[T]he [Government must retain and, upon *290 motion, make available to the district court both the rough notes and the drafts of reports of its agents to facilitate the district court’s determination whether they should be produced.” 714 F.2d at 259 ; Ramos, 27 F.3d at 68 (quoting the same language from Arrimar); see also United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275, 275-76 (3d Cir.1977) (“To avoid future misunderstandings, we specifically adopt the precepts announced in United States v. Harrison, 524 F.2d 421 (D.C.Cir.1975), as the law in this circuit, to…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Stracener
See also State v. Hodges, 349 So.2d 250 (La.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Keithan Jerome Owens
Id. (emphasis added); see also United States v. McMillian, 535 F.2d 1035 , 1037 n. 1 (8th Cir.1976) (finding unpersuasive the argument that 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c) is not within the scope of Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce and therefore reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. King
See also State v. Hodges, 349 So.2d 250 (La. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Soto v. Lefevre
See also Lipinski v. New York, 557 F.2d 289, 292-93 (2d Cir. 1977), cert. denied 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978); United States v. Guillette, 547 F.2d 743, 754 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. denied 434 U.S. 839 , 98 S.Ct. 132 , 54 L.Ed.2d 102 (1977). *598 Furthermore, the well-foundedness and constitutionality of the New York State corroboration requirement as applied in this case is confirmed by the existence of a similar corroboration requirement in the Federal Rules of Evidence as well as by the rulings of other courts in comparable contexts.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Leola Harshaw A/K/A \Squeaky\""
Compare United States v. Lambros, 564 F.2d 26, 30 (8th Cir.1977) (conspiracy proved), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978), with United States v. Brown, 584 F.2d 252, 264 (8th Cir.1978) (money found on defendant’s person not marked; no conspiracy proven), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 910 , 99 S.Ct. 1220 , 59 L.Ed.2d 458 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Bosier
Compare United States v. Vella, 562 F.2d 275 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1074 , 98 S.Ct. 1262 , 55 L.Ed.2d 779 (1978); United States v. Bufalino, 576 F.2d 446 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 928 , 99 S.Ct. 314 , 58 L.Ed.2d 321 (1979); and United States v. Carrasco, 537 F.2d 372 (9th Cir. 1976).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lipinski
v.
New York
v.
New York
No. 77-5763.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 21, 1978.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.