“mere ____ ______ speculation that a government file may contain brady material _____ is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera __ ______ inspection.”
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Rodriguez
mere ____ ______ speculation that a government file may contain brady material _____ is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera __ ______ inspection.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Rodriguez
mere speculation that a government file may contain brady material is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera inspection.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Cockhearn
(2×)
See State v. Acinelli, 191 Ariz. 66, 71 (App. 1997) (finding that "the defendant failed to demonstrate materiality" as his claims of finding impeachment evidence in government personnel files were "mere speculation" (quoting United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 631 (7th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 (1984))).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. George Georgiou
See United States v. Andrus, 775 F.2d 825, 843 (7th Cir.1985) (“ ‘Mere speculation that a government file may contain Brady material is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera inspection, much less reversal for a new trial.’”) (quoting United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States of America v. Nathan Benedict Dogskin, Jr.
Ray v. United States, 588 F.2d 601, 603 (8th Cir. 1978) (quotation omitted); see Peeler v. Wyrick, 734 F.2d 378, 381 (8th Cir.) (harmless error rule applies), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 437 , 83 L.Ed.2d 363 (1984). *687 3.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Nathan Dogskin, Jr.
Ray v. United States, 588 F.2d 601, 603 (8th Cir. 1978) (quotation -5- omitted); see Peeler v. Wyrick, 734 F.2d 378, 381 (8th Cir.) (harmless error rule applies), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 (1984) . 3.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. David Earnest
See United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 631 (7th Cir.1984), certiorari denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (reasoning that Brady claim is speculative when defendant gave no indication of existence of Brady material in file and contents of file were not made part of record).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hodgkiss
See United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 631 (7th Cir.) (“Mere speculation that a government file may contain Brady material is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera inspection, much less reversal for a new trial.”), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Antwon Rogers, and Adolphus Mitchell
The "purpose of Alford and Smith is achieved if sufficient evidence is admitted to identify the witness and locate him in his usual environment." Fife, 573 F.2d at 377 (citation omitted); see United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 633 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 (1984). 16 The district court allowed defense counsel to cross examine the confidential informant about his age (25); his nickname; his recent use of crack cocaine; his having received the crack cocaine from a "friend" who was not a government agent; his living with a friend's mother, who helped him financially; his lack o…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Quintanilla
See United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 630-31 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984) (speculative assertion *697 that impeaching material may be in a government file did not warrant order to disclose file’s contents); United States v. McDonnell, 696 F.Supp. 356, 363-64 (N.D.Ill.1988) (“[g]overnment need not produce raw investigative files on its witnesses from [various state and federal agencies]”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lov-It Creamery, Inc.
See United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 631 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984) (mere speculation by defendant regarding relevance of undisclosed material is insufficient to require remand to court for in camera review); see also United States v. Robinson, 585 F.2d 274, 281 (7th Cir.1978) (Brady request pertaining to 10,000 pages of government documents will not be reviewed by court *1553 unless defendant identifies with reasonable particularity the evidence to be considered).
discussed
Cited "see"
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROY LEE HODGKISS
See United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 631 (7th Cir.) (“Mere speculation that a government file may contain Brady material is not sufficient to require a remand for in camera inspection, much less reversal for a new trial.”), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S. Ct. 438 , 83 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Marian Fusko
“The verity that the trier of fact may and must make credibility determinations applies with full force to entrapment issues.” United States v. Garcia, 562 F.2d 411, 415 (7th Cir.1977); see also United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 636 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984); United States v. Townsend, 555 F.2d 152 , 157 n. 8 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 897 , 98 S.Ct. 277 , 54 L.Ed. 2d 184 (1977); United States v. Pingleton, 458 F.2d 722, 724 (7th Cir.1972).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. McDonnell
See Morgan v. Salamack, 735 F.2d 354, 358 (2d Cir.1984); see also United States v. Navarro, 737 F.2d 625, 630-631 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1020 , 105 S.Ct. 438 , 83 L.Ed.2d 364 (1984).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Shearson/American Express Inc.
v.
Neely
v.
Neely
No. 84-486.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 13, 1984.
469 U.S. 1020
1984 U.S. LEXIS 4392
Cited by 15 opinions | Published
Citer courts: First Circuit (2)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.