7 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1961–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey 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 |
|---|---|---|
Strawn v. Canusogreen2 sentences1997See Strawn v. Canuso, 140 N.J. at 61 , 657 A.2d 420 . 1997See Strawn v. Canuso, 140 N.J. at 61 , 657 A.2d 420 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Settegreen1 sentence1994See State v. Sette, 259 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Madison Wilson v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1 |
Lecil Hander v. San Jacinto Junior College, Etc.green2 sentences1978For example, in Handler v. San Jacinto Junior College, 519 F. 2d 273 (5 Cir.1975), which also involved a claim for an award of back pay, the court rejected proffered immunity defenses based upon the Eleventh Amendment and Wood . 1978In partial contrast to Owens, the back pay award was viewed alternatively "as damages for illegally terminated employment or as an aspect of equitable relief." Id. at 278. | 1 | 1 |
Robert C. Switzer v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patentsgreen1 sentence1961See Briscoe v. United States, supra, 251 F. 2d, at p. 387 ; cf. Bergen v. United States, supra, 145 F. 2d, at p. 187 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Warmbrun
green
1 sentence2008Id. at 64 , 648 A. 2d 1153 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Muhammad
green
2 sentences2008What is not permissible, however, is suggesting that the jury should reject the proffered defense because the defendant "remained silent when he had the opportunity to present it to the police." Ibid. 2008The Court reasoned, "In other words, the prosecutor impaled defendant on his silence, intimating that an innocent man would not have stopped speaking to the police officers, but would have revealed to them the defense offered as truth at trial." Id. at 566-67 , 868 A. 2d 302 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Andrew Mawson v. United States
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. Robert Bishop
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. Samuel Franklin Vale
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. Linda H. Schwarz
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. Billy Ray Huff
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
United States v. I. H. Hammerman, II
green
1 sentence1979See, e.g., Wilson v. United States, 534 F. 2d 130, 138 (9th Cir.1976) (Hufstedler, dissenting); United States v. Hammerman, 528 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir.1975); United States v. Huff, 512 F. 2d 66 (5th Cir.1975); United States v. Schwarz, 500 F. 2d 1350 (2d Cir.1974) ( per curiam ); United States v. Vale, 496 F. 2d 365 (5th Cir.1974); United States v. Bishop, 469 F. 2d 1337 (1st Cir.1972); Mawson v. United States, 463 F. 2d 29 (1st Cir.1972) ( per curiam ). [3] In making such a determination the judge should consider, inter alia, the extent of the asserted procedural deficiency, the possibility of ir | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Bergen v. United States
green
1 sentence1961See Briscoe v. United States, supra, 251 F. 2d, at p. 387 ; cf. Bergen v. United States, supra, 145 F. 2d, at p. 187 . | 1 | 1961–1961 |
John A. Gearhart v. United States
green
1 sentence1961In Gearhart v. United States, supra, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that upon the record before it the trial court should have granted the defendant’s presentence applica *203 tion for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty; in the course of its opinion it indicated that although the trial court was in no sense called upon to decide the ultimate merits of the defendant’s proffered defense of insanity it might have been justified in conducting a preliminary hearing if the government had urged that the defendant’s proffered defense was “patently frivolous.”' 2 | 1 | 1961–1961 |
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.