green
Positive treatment
6.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 23 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Theodore Edmonds
(2×)
But see United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1102-05 (7th Cir.1990) (requiring only two predicate offenses), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 , and cert. denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Vicente Joaquin Gonzalez, and Hector Berrios Colon, United States of America v. Vicente Joaquin Gonzalez & Hector Berrios Colon
But cf. United States v. Dennis, 902 F.2d 591 (7th Cir.) (finding notice of appeal from judgment of conviction ineffective to challenge district court's subsequent imposition of costs), cert. denied, 111 S. Ct. 206 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Valdez
See United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1196-97 (8th Cir. [1990]) (holding that Batson challenge raised for the first time after trial was untimely in part because only remedy after trial is vacating the conviction), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990); United States v. Forbes, 816 F.2d 1006, 1011 (5th Cir.1987)(‘‘The 'timely objection’ rule is designed to prevent defendants from 'sandbagging’ the prosecution by waiting until trial has concluded unsatisfactorily before insisting on an explanation for jury strikes that by then the prosecutor may larg…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Forriss D. Elliott
See United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1196-97 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
George McCrory v. Robert J. Henderson, Superintendent, Auburn Correctional Facility, Hon. Robert Abrams, Attorney General of the State of New York
See United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1196-97 (8th Cir.)(holding that Batson challenge raised for the first time after trial was untimely in part because only remedy after trial is vacating the conviction), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990); United States v. Forbes, 816 F.2d 1006, 1011 (5th Cir.1987) (“The ‘timely objection’ rule is designed to prevent defendants from ‘sandbagging’ the prosecution by waiting until trial has concluded unsatisfactorily before insisting on an explanation for jury strikes that by then the prosecutor may largely ha…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Teuscher
See United States v. Sykes, 977 F.2d 1242, 1246 (8th Cir.1992); accord United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1195 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jose Luis Mendoza-Lopez
See United States v. Lowden, 900 F.2d 213, 217-18 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 166 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Phibbs
See United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990) (holding that, while mere buyer/seller relationship alone does not support conspiracy conviction, evidence of "repeat purchases or some other enduring arrangement that implies knowledge of the scope of the conspiracy" may suffice).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Phibbs
See United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990) (holding that, while mere buyer/seller relationship alone does not support conspiracy conviction, evidence of “repeat purchases or some other enduring arrangement that implies knowledge of the scope of the conspiracy” may suffice).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Delbert Clark
See United States v. Lowden, 905 F.2d 1448, 1449 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 111 S.Ct. 206 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Willie J. Brown, United States of America v. Theodore R. Vaughn, United States of America v. James R. Sheil
See United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1196 (8th Cir.) (court does not determine "precise point” at which Batson objection is untimely, but con-eludes objection untimely when first raised in motion for new trial), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Curtis Weaver
See United States v. Lowden, 900 F.2d 213, 217-18 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 111 S.Ct. 206 (1990). 7 A district court undoubtedly may depart downward if it finds certain extraordinary circumstances are present.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lavada Long
See United States v. Lowden, 905 F.2d 1448 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 166 (1990).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Anthony Ray Jefferson and Roosevelt Jefferson, Jr.
See U.S. v. Lowden, 900 F.2d 213, 217-18 (10th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 166 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Michael L. Lamon, Also Known as Michael L. Anthony, Also Known as Michael L. Black
See United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990). 18 The court in Baker also noted that, at least in the absence of evidence of “repeat purchases or some other enduring arrangement that implies knowledge of the scope of the conspiracy,” we shall not affirm a conviction merely on the basis of credit sales, even though a credit arrangement could “support an inference that [the buyer] became a co-venturer by a profit-sharing arrangement.” Id. 2.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bruce C. Fox
See United States v. Lowden, 900 F.2d 213, 217-18 (10th Cir.) (“Lowden I”), later opinion, 905 F.2d 1448 (10th Cir.) (“Lowden II”), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 166 (1990). *822 FACTS On July 14, 1989, Fox entered a First Interstate Bank in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Louisiana v. Lamondre Tucker
See Morning v. Zapata Protein (USA), Inc., 128 F.3d 213, 216 (4th Cir.1997). (finding that “a Batson challenge raised after the venire has been excused has been raised too late”); McCrory v. Henderson, 82 F.3d 1243, 1246-49 (2d Cir.1996) (finding Batson challenges are waived if not raised during jury selection); United States v. Forbes, 816 F.2d 1006, 1011 (5th Cir.1987) (finding that “[n]ow it is toó late for appellants to insist on an explanation they did not request at trial”); Government of the Virgin Islands v. Forte, 806 F.2d 73, 75-76 (3rd Cir.1986) (finding defendant “waived…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Jessie Anderson
However, “where there is additional evidence beyond the mere purchase or sale, from which knowledge of the conspiracy may be inferred, courts have upheld conspiracy convictions.” Id.; see also United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990) (holding that mere buyer/seller relationship alone does not support conspiracy conviction, but evidence of “repeat purchases or some other enduring arrangement that implies knowledge of the scope of the conspiracy” may be sufficient).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Robinson
See, e.g., United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192, 1197 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S. Ct. 206 , 112 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Theodore Edmonds, in No. 93-1890. United States of America v. Lorenzo Duncan, A/K/A Tariq Lorenzo Duncan, in No. 93-1914. United States of America v. Carlton Love, in No. 93-1920. United States of America v. Cora Love, in No. 93-1947
United States v. Jones, 801 F.2d 304, 307 (8th Cir.1986) (noting that three separate, unrelated, drug sales would not establish a continuing series); see also United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1104 (7th Cir.) (stating that "an unrelated conspiracy does not count [for CCE purposes] because it cannot be part of the 'continuing' series"), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 , and cert. denied, 498 U.S. 904 , 111 S.Ct. 270 , 112 L.Ed.2d 226 (1990), and cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1030 , 111 S.Ct. 686 , 112 L.Ed.2d 677 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Edmonds
United States v. Jones, 801 F.2d 304, 307 (8th Cir.1986) (noting that three separate, unrelated, drug sales would not establish a continuing series); see also United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1104 (7th Cir.) (stating that “an unrelated conspiracy does not count [for CCE purposes] because it cannot be part of the ‘continuing’ series”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 , and cert. denied, 498 U.S. 904 , 111 S.Ct. 270 , 112 L.Ed.2d 226 (1990), and cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1030 , 111 S.Ct. 686 , 112 L.Ed.2d 677 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Michael A. Smith, and Kwabene D. German, A/K/A Kwabene Gibson
The government’s attempt to show otherwise by pointing to the large quantity of cocaine base involved does not salvage its case; we have stated on previous occasions that “large quantities of controlled substances, without more, cannot sustain a conspiracy conviction.” United States v. Lamon, 930 F.2d 1183 , 1191 n. 18 (7th Cir.1991); see also United States v. Baker, 905 F.2d 1100, 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 876 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Newman Lee Wiley
See id.; see also United States v. Dobynes, 905 F.2d 1192 (8th Cir.) (holding that evidence of prior crimes relevant to knowledge and intent issues raised by defendants’ “mere presence defense”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 877 , 111 S.Ct. 206 , 112 L.Ed.2d 167 (1990); cf. United States v. Jenkins, 7 F.3d 803, 807 (8th Cir.1993) (holding that 404(b) evidence inadmissible to prove intent where intent not at issue).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Allen
v.
Estelle, Warden
v.
Estelle, Warden
No. 90-5482.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 1990.
Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.