5 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2011 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 |
|---|---|---|
Alabama v. Smithgreen2 sentences2006This decision limited Pearce’s presumption of vindictiveness to circumstances “in which there is a ‘reasonable likelihood’ that the increase in sentence is the product of actual vindictiveness on the part of the sentencing authority.” Id. at 799 , 109 S. Ct. at 2205 , 104 L. 2006This decision limited Pearce’s presumption of vindictiveness to circumstances “in which there is a ‘reasonable likelihood’ that the increase in sentence is the product of actual vindictiveness on the part of the sentencing authority.” Id. at 799 , 109 S. Ct. at 2205 , 104 L. | 2 | 2 |
cluster 11348green2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 2 |
People v. Savalagreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
State v. Mirandagreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
Owens v. Stategreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
Adams v. Stategreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Linwood Gray, United States of America v. Harry L. Staleygreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
State v. Bolsingergreen2 sentences2011State v. Bolsinger, 738 N.W.2d 643, 646 (Iowa Ct.App.2007). 2011State v. Bolsinger, 738 N.W.2d 643, 646 (Iowa Ct.App.2007). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Thaeeb Baygreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Juan Pimienta-Redondo, United States of America v. Alfredo Pupogreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
Ronald Kelly v. E. Calvin Neubert, Administrator, and W. Carey Edwards, the Attorney General of the State of New Jerseygreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Bruno Mancarigreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Russell Sullivan, United States of America v. Mary Ann Sullivangreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kinggreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
People v. Woellhafgreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. McHalegreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
White v. Stategreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
People v. Foleygreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Robinsongreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
State v. Nevillegreen2 sentences2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, 2011United States v. Campbell, 106 F.3d 64, 68 (5th Cir.1997); United States v. Sullivan, 967 F.2d 370, 374 (10th Cir.1992); United States v. Mancan, 914 F.2d 1014, 1020 (7th Cir.1990); Kelly v. Neubert, 898 F.2d 15, 18 (3d Cir.1990); United States v. Pimienta-Redondo, 874 F.2d 9, 15 (1st Cir.1989); United States v. Gray, 852 F.2d 136, 138 (4th Cir.1988); United States v. Bay, 820 F.2d 1511, 1514 (9th Cir.1987); People v. Savala, 147 Cal.App.3d 63 , 195 Cal.Rptr. 193, 197 (1983), overruled on other grounds by People v. Foley, 170 Cal.App.3d 1039 , 216 Cal.Rptr. 865, 867 (1985); People v. Woellhaf, | 1 | 1 |
State v. Robbinsgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Forsythgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Curtisgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
Connelly v. Commissioner of Correctiongreen2 sentences2003See Connelly, 780 A.2d at 896-98 (summarizing Court holdings related to the vindictiveness standard). 2003See Connelly, 780 A.2d at 896-98 (summarizing Court holdings related to the vindictiveness standard). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Bestgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Colwellgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Mikesellgreen2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Bennett
neutral
2 sentences2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 2003Subsequent interpretations of the McCullough approach to questions of judicial vindictiveness in sentencing have resulted in the conclusion that “when a different judge sentences a defendant after a retrial, and that judge articulates logical, nonvindietive reasons for the sentence, there simply is no sound basis to presume that the sentence is the product of judicial vindictiveness.” Connelly, 780 A.2d at 901 ; see also State v. Robbins, 123 Idaho 527 , 850 P.2d 176, 180-81 (1993); State v. Colwell, 127 Idaho 854 , 908 P.2d 156, 161 (Ct.App.1995); State v. Forsyth, 233 Mont. 389 , 761 P.2d 36 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Texas v. McCullough
green
2 sentences2003In McCullough, the Court determined that the Pearce presumption was inapplicable, partially “because different sentencers [(a jury and then a judge)] assessed the varying sentences that McCullough received.” Id. at 140, 106 S.Ct. at 979 , 89 L.Ed.2d at 111-12 . 2003In McCullough, the Court determined that the Pearce presumption was inapplicable, partially “because different sentencers [(a jury and then a judge)] assessed the varying sentences that McCullough received.” Id. at 140, 106 S.Ct. at 979 , 89 L.Ed.2d at 111-12 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.