How cited: Santos v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Go Syfert

Santos v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1997)

green · 48 citation events across 12 courts. Showing the 13 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199820122026
But See · 11th Cir. · signal: but see
But see United States v. Adkins, 102 F.3d 111, 113 (4th Cir.1996), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 83 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997) (holding that "offenses” in effective date provision referred to illegal reentiy, not offense that led to deportation); United States v. Garcia-Rico, 46 F.3d 8, 10 (5th Cir.1995) (same).
holding that "offenses” in effective date provision referred to illegal reentiy, not offense that led to deportation
Cited · 6th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660-61 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997); United States v. Gonzales, 79 F.3d 413, 426-27 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 183 , 136 L.Ed.2d 122 (1996); United States v. Arango-Montoya, 61 F.3d 1331, 1338 (7th Cir. 1995); United States v. McChristian, 47 F.3d 1499, 1503 (9th Cir.1995); and United States v. Williams, 954 F.2d 668, 673 (11th Cir. 1992).
green Thomas v. Polk (2006)
Cited · 4th Cir. · signal: see
See State v. Thomas, 344 N.C. 639 , 477 S.E.2d 450 (1996), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654 (8th Cir.1997), ce rt. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654 (8th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Female Juvenile, 103 F.3d 14, 17 (5th Cir.1996) (“It is nonsensical to suppose that as a defendant draws nearer the age of twenty-one, the allowable penalty that a court may impose for violation of probation shrinks correspondingly.”), cer t. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 83 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997); see also United States v. G.C.A., 83 F.Supp.2d 253, 254-55 (D.P.R.2000) (concurring with Fifth Circuit’s analysis of § 5037).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.) (one panel of this court is not at liberty to overrule another panel’s decision), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 824 , 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997); United States v. Bates, 77 F.3d 1101, 1103-04 (8th Cir.) (finding application of § 922(g) to defendant who merely possessed firearm that traveled in interstate commerce was “eminently constitutional”), cer t. denied, 519 U.S. 884 , 117 S.Ct. 215 , 136 L.Ed.2d 149 (1996); U…
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.) (one Eighth Circuit panel may not overrule another panel's decision), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997). 3 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 660 (8th Cir.) (one Eighth Circuit panel may not overrule another panel's decision), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 84 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997). 5 Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 1 The Honorable Patrick A. Conmy, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota 2 We reject the government's suggestion that this appeal should be dismissed based on Mahto's purported waiver of his right to a…
green State v. Blackwell (1999)
Cited · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see
See State v. Thomas, 329 N.C. 423, 439 , 407 S.E.2d 141, 151 (1991), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 139 L.
green State v. Minor (1999)
Cited (see also) · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see, e.g.
See e.g., State v. Thomas, 329 N.C. 423, 438 , 407 S.E.2d 141, 151 (1991), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 139 L.
green In Re Duvall (1998)
Cited · Bankr. W.D. Tex. · signal: see
See United States v. Female Juvenile, 103 F.3d 14, 16-17 (5th Cir.1996) (“Axiomatic in statutory interpretation is the principle that laws should be construed to avoid an absurd or unreasonable result.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 83 , 139 L.Ed.2d 41 (1997).