Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 District of Columbia opinions name it 1 courts 1978–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by District of Columbia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In re Jonesgreen1 sentence2015See (.Anthony) Jones, 51 A.3d at 1292-93 . | 1 | 1 |
Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Charteredgreen2 sentences1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen cases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). 1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen eases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). | 1 | 1 |
Diamond v. Davisgreen2 sentences1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen cases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). 1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen eases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). | 1 | 1 |
District of Columbia v. Sierra Clubgreen2 sentences1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen cases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). 1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen eases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). | 1 | 1 |
Murphy v. McCloudgreen2 sentences1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen cases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). 1996District of Columbia v. Sierra Club, 670 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1996); Umana v. Swidler & Berlin, Chartered, 669 A.2d 717, 720 (D.C.1995); Murphy v. McCloud, 650 A.2d 202, 205 (D.C.1994); see Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364, 376 (D.C.1996) (considering on its merits argument for adoption of new rule that would contradict verbal formula repeated in over a dozen eases, where argument had not been considered in earlier cases). | 1 | 1 |
State, Ex Rel. Brown v. Howardgreen2 sentences1990See Howard, supra, 3 Ohio App.3d at 191-92 , 444 N.E.2d at 471-72 ; cf. J. 1990See Howard, supra, 3 Ohio App.3d at 191-92 , 444 N.E.2d at 471-72 ; cf. J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in District of Columbia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Welch v. United States
green
2 sentences2025If the Council concluded that rehabilitation and non-dangerousness alone were enough to justify a defendant’s immediate release after serving more than fifteen years in prison, the IRAA would not require a trial court to consider factors that reach beyond rehabilitation and dangerousness. 35 We emphasize that the IRAA’s directive to the trial court to determine whether “the interests of justice warrant a sentence modification,” id., is not an invitation for the trial court to engage in an unconstrained interests-of-justice inquiry untethered from the enumerated factors. 2025If the Council concluded that rehabilitation and non-dangerousness alone were enough to justify a defendant’s immediate release after serving more than fifteen years in prison, the IRAA would not require a trial court to consider factors that reach beyond rehabilitation and dangerousness. 35 We emphasize that the IRAA’s directive to the trial court to determine whether “the interests of justice warrant a sentence modification,” id., is not an invitation for the trial court to engage in an unconstrained interests-of-justice inquiry untethered from the enumerated factors. | 2 | 2025–2025 |
Von Moltke v. Gillies
green
2 sentences1978The fact that an accused may tell [the judge] that he is informed of his right to counsel and desires to waive this right does not automatically end the judge’s responsibility. [Id., 332 U.S. at 723-24 , 68 S.Ct. at 323 .] Faretta, supra, obviously forces a court to consider the waiver question in a new light, now that an accused has a constitutional right to self-representation, as well as to assistance of counsel. 1978The fact that an accused may tell [the judge] that he is informed of his right to counsel and desires to waive this right does not automatically end the judge’s responsibility. [Id., 332 U.S. at 723-24 , 68 S.Ct. at 323 .] Faretta, supra, obviously forces a court to consider the waiver question in a new light, now that an accused has a constitutional right to self-representation, as well as to assistance of counsel. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.