How cited: Barraza v. Arizona · Go Syfert

Barraza v. Arizona (1996)

green · 22 citation events across 11 courts. Showing the 8 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199720112026
green United States v. Pham (2003)
Cited · 10th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Windle, 74 F.3d 997,1001 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1342 , 134 L.Ed.2d 491 (1996).
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Martinez-Martinez, 69 F.3d 1215, 1225 (1st Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 492 (1996).
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See id.
Cited · S.D.N.Y. · signal: see
See United States v. Martinez-Martinez, 69 F.3d 1215, 1224 (1st Cir.1995) (guilty plea waived right to challenge drug conspiracy statute as unconstitutionally vague), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 492 (1996); United States v. Allen, 24 F.3d 1180, 1183 (10th Cir.1994) (“[Defendant] contends that because the statutes are unconstitutionally vague when applied to his conduct as he characterizes it, the court had no jurisdiction.
green Hopkins v. State (1998)
Cited (see also) · Md. · signal: see also
See also United States v. Kwong, 69 F.3d 663, 666 (2d Cir.1995), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 491 (1996) (applying the two-pronged test to determine whether a pretrial identification procedure tainted the subsequent in-court identification).
applying the two-pronged test to determine whether a pretrial identification procedure tainted the subsequent in-court identification
green Fernandez v. Dufrain (1998)
Cited (see also) · S.D.N.Y. · signal: see also
Mallette v. Scully, 752 F.2d at 32 (citations omitted); see also, e.g., United States v. Kwong, 14 F.3d 189, 194 (2d Cir.) (“By necessity, intent must usually be proven by circumstantial evidence.”), appeal after remand, 69 F.3d 663 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 491 (1996); Fratarcangelo v. Smith, 792 F.2d 40, 43 (2d Cir.1986) (“intent may be inferred and need not be proved by the defendant’s own statement, ... which is a correct state…
green United States v. Muyet (1998)
Cited · S.D.N.Y. · signal: see
See United States v. Kwong, 14 F.3d 189, 194 (2d Cir.1994), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 491 (1996).
Cited · E.D.N.Y · signal: see
See United States v. Kwong, 69 F.3d 663, 668 (2d Cir.1995) (citing cases), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1115 , 116 S.Ct. 1343 , 134 L.Ed.2d 491 (1996).