green
Positive treatment
2.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Griffin v. DeTella
See Vukadinovich v. McCarthy, 901 F.2d 1439, 1444 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1050 , 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 780 (1991); Van Dyke v. Washington, 896 F.Supp. 183, 188 (C.D.Ill.1995).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jesus Ochoa-Fabian, A/K/A Jose Jesus Fabian-Ochoa
Whitehead, 912 F.2d at 451 ; Trujillo, 906 F.2d at 1460 ; see United States v. Johnson, 911 F.2d 1394, 1402 (10th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 781 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6562, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,233 United States of America v. Kenneth M. Baker, United States of America v. Ralph Hale, United States of America v. Kenneth Baker Ralph Hale
Compare United States v. Kragness, 830 F.2d 842 (8th Cir.1987) and United States v. Johnson, 911 F.2d 1394, 1398 (10th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1050 , 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 781 (1991), with United States v. Deshaw, 974 F.2d 667 (5th Cir.1992). 18 Whether they are or not, however, conviction and punishment for both is permissible. "[T]he Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that, at least in cases where cumulative punishments are imposed in a single prosecution, the Blockburger rule is a tool of statutory construction used to determine legislative intent rather than a constitu…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Baker
Compare United States v. Kragness, 830 F.2d 842 (8th Cir.1987) and United States v. Johnson, 911 F.2d 1394, 1398 (10th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1050 , 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 781 (1991), with United States v. Deshaw, 974 F.2d 667 (5th Cir.1992). 18 Whether they are or not, however, conviction and punishment for both is permissible. “[T]he Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that, at least in eases where cumulative punishments are imposed in a single prosecution, the Blockburger rule is a tool of statutory construction used to determine legislative intent rather than a consti…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hill
United States v. Starusko, 729 F.2d 256, 260 ; see also United States v. Johnson, 911 F.2d 1394, 1404 (10th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 781 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Troy T. Coleman
See, e.g., United States v. Mocciola, 891 F.2d 13, 17 (1st Cir.1989) (deciding sentencing court may consider reliable facts underlying acquittal), declined to follow by United States v. Brady, 928 F.2d 844, 850-852 (9th Cir.1991) (refusing to enhance sentence on basis of intent to kill after defendant’s acquittal of murder); see also United States v. Johnson, 911 F.2d 1394, 1401 (10th Cir.1990) (rejecting double jeopardy argument based upon use of evidence at sentencing on distribution charge where such evidence had been held lacking in specificity to support a conspiracy charge), cert. deni…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Winston Network, Inc. v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad
Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b); see also Vukadinovich v. McCarthy, 901 F.2d 1439, 1445 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 780 (1991); Green v. Bishy, 869 F.2d 1070, 1072 (7th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Winston Network, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company, an Indiana Corporation, Defendant-Cross-Plaintiff-Appellee v. Aetna Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation, Defendant-Cross-Defendant-Appellant. Winston Network, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company, an Indiana Corporation v. Aetna Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation, Winston Network, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company, an Indiana Corporation, Defendant-Cross-Plaintiff-Appellant v. Aetna Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation, Defendant-Cross-Defendant-Appellee. Winston Network, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company, an Indiana Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Plaintiff-Appellee v. Aetna Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Defendant-Appellant. Winston Network, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company, an Indiana Corporation
FED.R.CIV.P. 6(b); see also Vukadinovich v. McCarthy, 901 F.2d 1439, 1445 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 111 S.Ct. 761 , 112 L.Ed.2d 780 (1991); Green v. Bisby, 869 F.2d 1070, 1072 (7th Cir.1989).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brown
v.
Bi-State Development Agency
v.
Bi-State Development Agency
No. 90-6239.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 14, 1991.
Published
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.