green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.2 score
“a person may be found to conduct or to participate in the conduct of an enterprise even though he is a mere employee having no part in the management or control of the enterprise and no share in the profits.”
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Battle
a person may be found to conduct or to participate in the conduct of an enterprise even though he is a mere employee having no part in the management or control of the enterprise and no share in the profits.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Fidel MacIas
See United States v. Rutledge, 28 F.3d 998, 1004 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 1161 (1995). 7 The district court expressly disclaimed any reliance on the defendant's invocation of the Fifth Amendment.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Josleyn
See United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 746 (1st Cir.1994) (tolerating measured response to repeated attempts to magnify government *1198 misconduct), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 115 S.Ct. 1161 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Josleyn
See United ___ _____ ___ ______ States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 746 (1st Cir. 1994) (tolerating ______ _____ 36 measured response to repeated attempts to magnify government mis- conduct), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1161 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wihbey
See United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 746 (1st Cir.1994) (prosecutor’s argument that “nobody lied” was “mild vouching, essentially harmless”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1161 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1995); United States v. Innamorati, 996 F.2d 456, 483 (1st Cir.) (stating that the line between proper argument that a witness is credible and improper vouching is “often hazy”), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 409 , 126 L.Ed.2d 356 (1993).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wihbey
See ___ United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 746 (1st Cir. 1994) ______________ _____ (prosecutor's argument that "nobody lied" was "mild vouching, essentially harmless"), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1161 (1995); _____ ______ United States v. Innamorati, 996 F.2d 456, 483 (1st Cir.) _____________ __________ (stating that the line between proper argument that a witness is credible and improper vouching is "often hazy"), cert. _____ denied, 114 S. Ct. 409 (1993).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Berthoff
See United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 747 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 1161 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Berthoff
See United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 747 (1st ___ _____________ _____ Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1161 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gabriele
See Hurley, 63 F.3d at 9 (finding no plain error, noting that Reves has no relevance to defendants who were “employees,” as distinguished from independent or outside participants like the accounting firm in Reves) (citing United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 750 (1st Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 1161 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1995)).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gabriele
See Hurley, __ F.3d at ___ [slip. op. at 12-13] ___ ______ (finding no plain error, noting that Reves has no relevance to _____ defendants who were "employees," as distinguished from indepen- dent or outside participants like the accounting firm in Reves) _____ (citing United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 750 (1st Cir. 1994), _____________ _____ cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1161 (1995)). _____ ______ The government introduced ample evidence unchal- lenged on appeal that Gabriele, unlike the accounting firm in Reves, was not an independent "outsider" but a full-fledged _____ "employee" of the Sacco…
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alzanki
See United ___ ______ States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 749 (1st Cir. 1994) (evidence of ______ _____ victim's awareness of defendant's prior bad acts against third parties is especially relevant to an element of the offense, i.e., the reasonableness of the stated basis for the victim's fear) (citing United States v. DeVincent, 546 F.2d 452 , 456-57 _____________ _________ (1st Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 903 (1977)), cert. ____ ______ ____ denied, 115 S.Ct. 1161 (1995). ______ 3.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Alzanki
See United States v. Oreto, 37 F.3d 739, 749 (1st Cir.1994) (evidence of victim’s awareness of defendant’s prior bad acts against third parties is especially relevant to an element of the offense, i.e., the reasonableness of the stated basis for the victim’s fear) (citing United States v. DeVincent, 546 F.2d 452, 456-57 (1st Cir.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 903 , 97 S.Ct. 1694 , 52 L.Ed.2d 387 (1977)), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 1161 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1995). 3.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Freddie Fenton, A/K/A Fred Fox A/K/A Fred Barrett, Freddie Fenton
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Rutledge, 28 F.3d 998 (9th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1177 , 115 S.Ct. 1161 , 130 L.Ed.2d 1117 (1995) (holding that there was no double counting where a district court applies Section 2K2.1(b)(5) to enhance a conviction for being a felon in possession where the defendant used a firearm to rob a shop).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ables
v.
Scott, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
v.
Scott, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division
No. 94-7563.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 21, 1995.
Published
Citer courts: S.D. Florida (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.