green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.1 score
“he constitution forbids striking even a single prospective juror for a discriminatory purpose”
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Cheatteam
he constitution forbids striking even a single prospective juror for a discriminatory purpose
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Elliott
See State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244, 286-87 , 439 S.E.2d 547, 569-70 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 (1994).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Carter
See State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244, 280 , 439 S.E.2d 547, 565-66 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Green v. Commissioner of Mental Health & Mental Retardation
See United States v. Jackson, 815 F.Supp. 195, 198-99 (N.D.Tex.1993) (rejecting argument that confinement cannot constitutionally continue when acquittees illness was in remission because of treatment with medication), aff'd, 19 F.3d 1003 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 115 S.Ct. 237 , 130 L.Ed.2d 160 (1994). 4 .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Fleming
See State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244, 291 , 439 S.E.2d 547, 572 (finding no error when trial court ordered defendant’s witness to prepare a report so that the State may prepare for that witness’ testimony), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Atkins
See State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244 , 439 S.E.2d 547 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Long
Burden of Proof “The proponent of a motion to suppress bears the burden of proof.” United States, v. Madrid, 30 F.3d 1269, 1274 (10th Cir.) {citing-United States v. Carr, 939 F.2d 1442, 1446 (10th Cir.1991), cert, denied, 513 U.S. 1007 , 115 S.Ct. 527 , 130 L.Ed.2d 431 (1994); see United States v. Moore, 22 F.3d 241, 243 (10th Cir.),, cert, denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 115 S.Ct. 238 , 130 L.Ed.2d 161 (1994); cfi, United States v. Carhee, 27 F.3d 1493, 1497 (10th Cir.1994)) (“As to the warrantless encounter, [the defendant] bears the burden of proving whether and when the Fourth Amendment was i…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Flowers
See State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244 , 439 S.E.2d 547 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Verlin
Burden of Proof “The proponent of a motion to suppress bears the burden of proof.” United States v. Madrid, 30 F.3d 1269,1274 (10th Cir.) (citing United States v. Carr, 939 F.2d 1442, 1446 (10th Cir.1991), cert, denied, 513 U.S. 1007 , 115 S.Ct. 527 , 130 L.Ed.2d 431 (1994); see United States v. Moore, 22 F.3d 241, 243 (10th Cir.), cert, denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 115 S.Ct. 238 , 130 L.Ed.2d 161 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Perkins
“A witness may be cross-examined on any matter relevant to any issue in the case, including credibility.” N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 611(b) (1992); accord State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244, 271 , 439 S.E.2d 547, 560 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lawrence
Ed. 2d 173 (1983); see also State v. Lee, 335 N.C. 244, 298 , 439 S.E.2d 547, 576 (affirming the death sentence where the jury found the existence of the (f)(2) and (f)(6) mitigating circumstances), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 130 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Perez
See, e.g., United States v. Williams, 20 F.3d 125 , 129 n. 2 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 , 115 S.Ct. 239 , 130 L.Ed.2d 162 (1994) (holding it was not error for the trial court to have employed a modified version of the FJC instruction, but urging that trial courts use the Fifth Circuit’s Pattern Jury Instruction instead); United States v. Hunt, 794 F.2d 1095, 1100 (5th Cir.1986) (finding no error in the district court’s use of a modified version of the FJC instruction, but instead encouraging the lower courts to use the Fifth Circuit’s Pattern Jury Instruction); McBride, 786 F…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Bonnett
This Court concluded that since (i) “defendant was in a position to observe the context of the conferences and to inquire of his attorneys as to the nature and substance of each one [and]... had a firsthand source as to what transpired,” (ii) “defense counsel had the opportunity and obligation to raise for the record any matter to which defendant took exception,” and (iii) defendant “failed to demonstrate that the bench conferences implicated his constitutional right to be present or that his presence would have substantially affected his opportunity to defend,” the trial court “…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Miguel A. Ramirez v. Sherman Hatcher, Warden
(2×)
See, e.g., Monk v. Zelez, 901 F.2d 885, 889-90 (10th Cir.1990) (holding unconstitutional an instruction that defined reasonable doubt as "substantial" doubt and used "willing to act" language); United States v. Jensen, 561 F.2d 1297, 1300-01 (8th Cir.1977) (stating that instruction was "defective" because it failed to use "hesitate to act" language, but declining to reverse conviction because issue was not raised on appeal); Scurry v. United States, 347 F.2d 468, 470 (D.C.Cir.1965) (stating that instruction "den[ied] the defendant the benefit of a reasonable doubt" in stating that the evidence…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Sbordone
See also United States v. Robertson, 21 F.3d 1030, 1032-1034 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 891 (1994); United States v. Clouston, 623 F.2d 485, 486 (6th Cir. 1980).
Williams
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 94-5238.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 3, 1994.
Published
Citer courts: Louisiana Court of Appeal (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.