United States v. Joseph Charles Thompson, 842 F.2d 1293 (4th Cir. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Joseph Charles Thompson, 842 F.2d 1293 (4th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
43 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gaddy v. Alexander Correction Institution (ncwd, 2024-06-26)
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Gaddy v. Alexander Correction Institution
W.D.N.C. · 2024 · confidence medium
However, the Ninth Amendment is a rule of construction that “creates no constitutional rights.” Wohlford v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 842 F.2d 1293, 1293 (4th Cir. 1988).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hunter v. NC DPS
W.D.N.C. · 2021 · confidence medium
BACKGROUND The pro se Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his Fifth, Eighth, and Ninth1 Amendment rights were violated at the Piedmont and Eastern Correctional Institutions, and the Gaston and Catawba County Jails.2 He names as Defendants: the North Carolina 1 “[T]he Ninth Amendment creates no constitutional rights.” Wohlford v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 842 F.2d 1293, 1293 (4th Cir. 1988); Swanson v. King, 2021 WL 3856454 , at *4 (E.D.N.C.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Swanson v. King
E.D.N.C. · 2021 · confidence medium
Seventh, defendant asserts a Ninth Amendment claim. “[T]he Ninth Amendment creates no constitutional rights.” Wohlford v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 842 F.2d 1293, 1293 (4th Cir. 1988).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Wesley v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department
W.D.N.C. · 2021 · confidence medium
IX. “[T]he Ninth Amendment creates no constitutional rights.” Wohlford v. U.S. Dep't of Agriculture, 842 F.2d 1293, 1293 (4th Cir. 1988) (citing Strandberg v. City of Helena, 791 F.2d 744 , 748 (9th Cir.1986)); see Cooper Butt ex rel Q.T.R. v. Barr, 954 F.3d 901, 908 (6th Cir. 2020) (same); Phillips v. City of New York, 775 F.3d 538, 544 (2d Cir. 2015) (same).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Futrell v. Cooper
W.D.N.C. · 2021 · confidence medium
IX. “[T]he Ninth Amendment creates no constitutional rights.” Wohlford v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 842 F.2d 1293, 1293 (4th Cir. 1988); see Cooper Butt ex rel Q.T.R. v. Barr, 954 F.3d 901, 908 (6th Cir. 2020) (same); Phillips v. City of New York, 775 F.3d 538, 544 (2d Cir. 2015) (same).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. George E. Moore (88-5932) and Charles R. Morse, (88-5942)
6th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Shavers, 820 F.2d 1375, 1378 (4th Cir.1987), aff'd on remand, 842 F.2d 1293 (1988); United States v. Harris, 832 F.2d 88, 91 (7th Cir.1987); United States v. York, 830 F.2d 885 (8th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1074 , 108 S.Ct. 1047 , 98 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1988); and United States v. Springfield, 829 F.2d 860, 865 (9th Cir.1987).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Ford v. Northam
W.D. Va. · 2023 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Wohlford v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 842 F.2d 1293 , 1988 WL 24281, at *1 (4th Cir. 1988) (unpublished table decision) (citing Strandberg); Evans v. Pitt Cnty.
United States
v.
Joseph Charles Thompson
87-5003.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Mar 2, 1988.
842 F.2d 1293
Unpublished

842 F.2d 1293
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Joseph Charles THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 87-5003.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 29, 1988.
Decided March 2, 1988.

Jeffrey L. Shrom, on brief, for appellant.

Breckenridge L. Willcox, United States Attorney; Joseph Sedwick Sollers, III, and Max H. Lauten, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief, for appellee.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, ERVIN and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Joseph C. Thompson appeals from a judgment of conviction entered in the District of Maryland on four counts of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7201. We affirm.

2

The sole issue Thompson raises on appeal is that the evidence presented to the grand jury was insufficient to support the charges against him so that the indictment should now be dismissed. It is settled, however, that a "conviction cannot be overturned by showing that the grand jury lacked sufficient evidence to make a rational finding of probable cause to believe that the defendant had in fact committed the crime[s] charged in the indictment." United States v. Rolfe, 777 F.2d 1200, 1203 (7th Cir.1985). See United States v. Mechanik, 425 U.S. 66, 67 (1986) ("the petit jury's verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt demonstrates a fortiori that there was probable cause to charge the defendants with the offenses for which they were convicted"); Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 363 (1956) ("[a]n indictment returned by a ... grand jury, ... if valid on its face, is enough to call for trial of the charges on the merits. The Fifth Amendment requires nothing more").

3

We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issue recently has been decided authoritatively and affirm the conviction.

4

AFFIRMED.