green
Positive treatment
1.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Johnson v. State
See also State v. Hoffman, 116 Idaho 689, 692 , 778 P.2d 811, 814 (Ct.App.1989)(although trial court admonishment not mandatory, without admonishment, the record must reflect defendant's awareness of his right to testify; interpreting Aragon narrowly); Id. (citing State v. Darbin, 109 Idaho 516 , 708 P.2d 921 (Ct.App.1985))(ap-plying Chapman standard); but see State v. Fields, 127 Idaho 904, 912 , 908 P.2d 1211, 1219 , cert. denied, 516 U.S. 922 , 116 S.Ct. 319 , 133 L.Ed.2d 221 (1995)(reiterating Ara-gon's holding that trial court has no duty to advise defendant of right to testify). 52 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hunt
See, Burris v. Farley, 51 F.3d 655, 662 (7th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 922 , 116 S. Ct. 319 , 133 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hines
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 95-5612.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 10, 1995.
Published
C. A. 11th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.