green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.4 score
“generally, a district court will allow reopening to establish venue, identify the defendant, or attend to other technical matters”
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Commonwealth v. Hurley
generally, a district court will allow reopening to establish venue, identify the defendant, or attend to other technical matters
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Jacob Plitman
See United States v. Leslie, 103 F.3d 1093, 1100 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1220 , 117 S.Ct. 1713 , 137 L.Ed.2d 837 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Guillermo Aliro Perez
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Leslie, 103 F.3d 1093, 1098 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1220 , 117 S.Ct. 1713 , 137 L.Ed.2d 837 (1997); United States v. Levy, 25 F.3d at 153 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. John Arena and Michelle Wentworth
We have held that “Lopez did not raise the jurisdictional hurdle for bringing a Hobbs Act prosecution,” that is, that Lopez “did not alter the long-standing rule that the Government need only demonstrate a de minimis effect upon commerce in order to establish jurisdiction under the [Hobbs] Act.” United States v. Farrish, 122 F.3d at 147, 148 ; see also United States v. Leslie, 103 F.3d 1093, 1100 (2d Cir.) (“Since Lopez , courts interpreting the Hobbs Act ... have continued to hold that Lopez did not affect this de minimis standard.”), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1220 , 117 S.Ct. 1713 ,…
Tripati
v.
Arizona
v.
Arizona
No. 96-8496.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 12, 1997.
520 U.S. 1220
Published
Citer courts: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial… (1)
Super. Ct. Ariz., Maricopa County. Certiorari denied.