Holloway v. United States (1984)
green
· 71 citation events
across 24 courts.
Showing the 11 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198520052026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
United States v. Michael C. Pennyman (1989)
See United States v. Holloway, 731 F.2d 378, 381 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984) (“[W]e must view the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the government.
“[W]e must view the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the government. If the evidence is such that a reasonable mind might fairly find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the denial of defendant’s motion for acquittal must be affirmed.”
green
United States v. Thomas James Savoca (1985)
See United States v. Holloway, 740 F.2d 1373, 1375 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984).
green
United States v. Samuel M. Chaimson (1985)
See also United States v. Levy, 741 F.2d 915, 924 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984); United States v. Jordan, 722 F.2d 353, 357 (7th Cir.1983); Weidman, 572 F.2d at 1201-02 .
green
United States v. Scott Payne (1999)
See United States v. Holloway, 740 F.2d 1373, 1383 (6th Cir.) (stating this rule with respect to probation and noting the dual goals of probation of rehabilitating the defendant and protecting the public), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984).
green
United States v. Charles E. Coleman (1993)
See United States v. Holloway, 731 F.2d 378, 381 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984) ("[W]e must view the evidence and all the reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the government.
See generally section XVIII of the Practitioner’s Handbook for Appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. "[T]he shotgun inclusion of issues may be the basis of hitting the target with something but still runs the risk of obscuring the significant issues by dilution.” United States v. Levy, 741 F.2d 915, 924 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984). 3 .
green
United States v. Vijay Parekh (1991)
See also United States v. Levy, 741 F.2d 915, 921-22 (7th Cir.) ("An actual desire to inflict harm on the bank is not required.”), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984); United States v. Krepps, 605 F.2d 101, 104 (3d Cir.1979); United States v. Larson, 581 F.2d 664, 667 (7th Cir.1978); United States v. Killian, 541 F.2d 1156, 1159-60 (5th Cir.1976); United States v. Schmidt, 471 F.2d 385, 386 (3d Cir.1972) (per curiam).
green
United States v. George Kelley (1988)
See United States v. Holloway, 740 F.2d 1373, 1377 (6th Cir.) cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984).
green
Kakaygeesick v. Salazar (2009)
Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1, 5 , 124 S.Ct. 1 , 157 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003); see also, Gagan v. American Cablevision, Inc., 77 F.3d 951, 955 (7th Cir.1996) ("Losers in a trial can go hunting for relief on appeal with a rifle or a shotgun,” and "[t]he rifle is better,” "[a]s * * * the shotgun approach may hit the target with something but it runs the risk of obscuring significant issues by dilution.”), citing United States v. Levy, 741 F.2d 915, 924 (7th Cir.1984), cert. denied,…
green
Williams v. Patel (2000)
See United States v. Levy, 741 F.2d 915, 924 (7th Cir.) (failure to object to testimony at trial limits review to the identifica *993 tion of a plain error), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 440 , 83 L.Ed.2d 366 (1984).
green
State v. Miller (1988)
See United States v. Del Prado-Montero, 740 F.2d 113, 115 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1021 , 105 S.Ct. 441 , 83 L.Ed. 2d 366 (1984); 469 U.S. 1042 , 105 S.Ct. 527 , 83 L.Ed.2d 415 (1984); 469 U.S. 1164 , 105 S.Ct. 924 , 83 L.Ed.2d 936 (1985).