context stringlengths 58 1.13k | citation_a dict | citation_b dict | case_id int64 475 12.5M | label stringclasses 2
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
There was no error. We recognize that references to a defendant's alias (or nickname) by the prosecution can be prejudicial because "[a]liases can be suggestive of bad character and prior criminality, and therefore raise a possibility that the jury will improperly consider criminal propensity." | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "442 Mass. 1002, 1003",
"parenthetical": "prosecution's repeated, gratuitous use of defendant's alias, including comment in closing argument, \"How can you trust somebody who has two names at the outset?\" was improper and required reversal of defendant's conviction",
"sentence"... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "423 Mass. 506, 514-515",
"parenthetical": "prosecution's repeated use of defendant's alias, \"Kilo,\" in murder case where drug dealing was at issue was improper, but in light of other evidence did not require reversal of defendant's conviction",
"sentence": "Commonwealth... | 4,270,579 | b |
And we conclude, contrary to CDOT's view, that "context" does not refer to circumstances that could arise if CDOT were required to obtain permits from local governments. Instead, context refers only to pertinent statutory language-the text of the AASIA and related statutes. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "820 P.2d 1124, 1128",
"parenthetical": "the phrase, \"unless the context otherwise requires,\" refers not to the factual context of a particular transaction but to the language of the statute",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. Serv. Corp. v. Selby, 820 P.2d 1124, 1128 (Colo.App.1991)... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "506 U.S. 194, 199-200",
"parenthetical": "\" 'Context' here means the text of the Act of Congress surrounding the word at issue, or the texts of other related congressional Acts, and this is simply an instance of the word's ordinary meaning.\"",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. ... | 12,254,165 | a |
And we conclude, contrary to CDOT's view, that "context" does not refer to circumstances that could arise if CDOT were required to obtain permits from local governments. Instead, context refers only to pertinent statutory language-the text of the AASIA and related statutes. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "820 P.2d 1124, 1128",
"parenthetical": "the phrase, \"unless the context otherwise requires,\" refers not to the factual context of a particular transaction but to the language of the statute",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. Serv. Corp. v. Selby, 820 P.2d 1124, 1128 (Colo.App.1991)... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "\" 'Context' here means the text of the Act of Congress surrounding the word at issue, or the texts of other related congressional Acts, and this is simply an instance of the word's ordinary meaning.\"",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. Serv. Corp. v. Selb... | 12,254,165 | a |
And we conclude, contrary to CDOT's view, that "context" does not refer to circumstances that could arise if CDOT were required to obtain permits from local governments. Instead, context refers only to pertinent statutory language-the text of the AASIA and related statutes. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "\" 'Context' here means the text of the Act of Congress surrounding the word at issue, or the texts of other related congressional Acts, and this is simply an instance of the word's ordinary meaning.\"",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. Serv. Corp. v. Selb... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "820 P.2d 1124, 1128",
"parenthetical": "the phrase, \"unless the context otherwise requires,\" refers not to the factual context of a particular transaction but to the language of the statute",
"sentence": "See Pima Fin. Serv. Corp. v. Selby, 820 P.2d 1124, 1128 (Colo.App.1991)... | 12,254,165 | b |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "228 F.3d 729, 742",
"parenthetical": "holding that a collective bargaining agreement between school board and teachers union established a teachers' legitimate claim of entitlement to their positions at elementary school",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "470 U.S. 538, 538-39",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permit... | 2,997,497 | b |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "470 U.S. 538, 538-39",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permit... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "844 F.2d 1268, 1272",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute and a school board policy providing for accumulation of sick days by public employees created a property interest in those sick days",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487... | 2,997,497 | a |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "470 U.S. 538, 538-39",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permit... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "403 U.S. 207, 208",
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting empl... | 2,997,497 | a |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal ... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "470 U.S. 538, 538-39",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permit... | 2,997,497 | b |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "470 U.S. 538, 538-39",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permit... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal ... | 2,997,497 | a |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dism... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "228 F.3d 729, 742",
"parenthetical": "holding that a collective bargaining agreement between school board and teachers union established a teachers' legitimate claim of entitlement to their positions at elementary school",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538... | 2,997,497 | a |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dism... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "844 F.2d 1268, 1272",
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute and a school board policy providing for accumulation of sick days by public employees created a property interest in those sick days",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487... | 2,997,497 | a |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "403 U.S. 207, 208",
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting empl... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dism... | 2,997,497 | b |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal ... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dism... | 2,997,497 | b |
State law, contract, or a promise implied from circumstances, are generally sufficient to create a property interest protected by due process. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal only for cause, created a property interest in continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dism... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that due process also protected non-tenured public employees retained by the promise of continued employment",
"sentence": "See e.g., Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 538-39, 105 S.Ct. 1487 (finding that a state statute, permitting employee dismissal ... | 2,997,497 | a |
Sidestepping these cases, Airlog argues that the FAA's actions are not susceptible to policy analysis because they were based on objective scientific standards. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "864 F.2d 1497, 1504",
"parenthetical": "holding that the decision regarding the amount of dynamite that would be safe under the circumstances was \"governed by objective standards which the government must use due care in following\" and is not susceptible to policy analysis... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "71 F.3d 1453, 1453-54",
"parenthetical": "holding that \"scientific hydrographic judgment\" and \"purely scientific considerations\" do not involve policy considerations and are not protected by the discretionary function exception",
"sentence": "See Glacier Bay, 71 F.3d at 145... | 11,152,426 | b |
Sidestepping these cases, Airlog argues that the FAA's actions are not susceptible to policy analysis because they were based on objective scientific standards. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "864 F.2d 1497, 1504",
"parenthetical": "holding that the decision regarding the amount of dynamite that would be safe under the circumstances was \"governed by objective standards which the government must use due care in following\" and is not susceptible to policy analysis... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "880 F.2d 1018, 1031",
"parenthetical": "holding that the decision not to remove materials during canal construction \"was based not on policy judgments but on technical, scientific, engineering considerations\" and, thus, is not susceptible to policy considerations",
"sentence"... | 11,152,426 | b |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "criminal prosecution for the crime of escape is not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment because a convict guilty thereof has upon his recapture been subjected to discipline by the prison authorities for the violation of p... | 515,217 | a |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "criminal prosecution for the crime of escape is not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment because a convict guilty thereof has upon his recapture been subjected to discipline by the prison authorities for the violation of p... | 515,217 | a |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "criminal prosecution for the crime of escape is not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment because a convict guilty thereof has upon his recapture been subjected to discipline by the prison authorities for the violation of p... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | 515,217 | b |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "criminal prosecution for the crime of escape is not prohibited under the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment because a convict guilty thereof has upon his recapture been subjected to discipline by the prison authorities for the violation of p... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | 515,217 | b |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "administrative punishment does not render a subsequent judicial prosecution violative of the fifth amendment prohibition of double jeopardy",
"sentence": "See also Patterson v. United States, 183 F.2d 327 (4th Cir.1950), cert. denied, 340 U.S. 893, 7... | 515,217 | a |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "disciplinary sanctions imposed by prison authorities for infractions of prison regulations do not bar a subsequent criminal prosecution",
"sentence": "See also Patterson v. United States, 183 F.2d 327 (4th Cir.1950), cert. denied, 340 U.S. 893, 71 S.... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | 515,217 | b |
Although this precise issue has not heretofore been squarely addressed by our own Supreme Court, it has been raised in numerous other state and federal jurisdictions. A reading of these various cases reveals uniform acceptance of the proposition that prison disciplinary proceedings do not constitute a double jeopardy b... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "administrative punishment imposed by prison officials does not render the subsequent judicial proceeding violative of the prohibition against double jeopardy",
"sentence": "See also Patterson v. United States, 183 F.2d 327 (4th Cir.1950), cert. denie... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "wherein the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in accepting the above proposition, noted numerous other jurisdictions had, almost without exception, held that a federal or state charge for escape is not barred by the prior imposition of administrative discipline b... | 515,217 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal for failure to raise a substantial federal question bars later action based on identical claim",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal of complaint for lack of jurisdiction bars later \"almost identical\" complaint",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation o... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "287 U.S. 156, 166",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 ... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal for failure to raise a substantial federal question bars later action based on identical claim",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "53 S.Ct. 98, 101",
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal of complaint for lack of jurisdiction bars later \"almost identical\" complaint",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation o... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation of same factual issues in Missouri court",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court ... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "diversity action in federal court barred by previous action dismissed by state court for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | 392,687 | a |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "collateral attack on judgment based on lack of jurisdiction barred by trial court's denial of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictio... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal for failure to raise a substantial federal question bars later action based on identical claim",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
Even if Baldovin is to be viewed as more comparable to a ruling on jurisdiction of the court, precedent indicates that the decision would stand as a bar to relitigation of the issue of jurisdiction. "The principles of res judicata apply to questions of jurisdiction as well as to other issues." | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "dismissal of complaint for lack of jurisdiction bars later \"almost identical\" complaint",
"sentence": "See also Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 84 S.Ct. 242, 11 L.Ed.2d 186 (1963) (finding of jurisdictional facts by Nebraska court bars relitigation o... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "constitutional claim in federal court barred by previous state court action in which due process challenge to jurisdiction was raised and rejected",
"sentence": "American Surety Co. v. Baldwin, 287 U.S. 156, 166, 53 S.Ct. 98, 101, 77 L.Ed. 231 (1932... | 392,687 | b |
In his complaint, Lay alleged that the prosecution was in fact terminated in his favor. We conclude that this argument was waived, and we therefore do not address it. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "150 Vt. 294, 297",
"parenthetical": "explaining that appellant bears burden of demonstrating how the trial court erred warranting reversal, and Supreme Court will not comb the record searching for error",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 75... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "170 Vt. 450, 459",
"parenthetical": "\"Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the trial court are not preserved for appeal.\"",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 752 A.2d 26, 33 (2000) (“Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the tr... | 3,688,491 | b |
In his complaint, Lay alleged that the prosecution was in fact terminated in his favor. We conclude that this argument was waived, and we therefore do not address it. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "553 A.2d 1078, 1081",
"parenthetical": "explaining that appellant bears burden of demonstrating how the trial court erred warranting reversal, and Supreme Court will not comb the record searching for error",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459,... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "170 Vt. 450, 459",
"parenthetical": "\"Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the trial court are not preserved for appeal.\"",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 752 A.2d 26, 33 (2000) (“Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the tr... | 3,688,491 | b |
In his complaint, Lay alleged that the prosecution was in fact terminated in his favor. We conclude that this argument was waived, and we therefore do not address it. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "150 Vt. 294, 297",
"parenthetical": "explaining that appellant bears burden of demonstrating how the trial court erred warranting reversal, and Supreme Court will not comb the record searching for error",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 75... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "752 A.2d 26, 33",
"parenthetical": "\"Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the trial court are not preserved for appeal.\"",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 752 A.2d 26, 33 (2000) (“Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the tri... | 3,688,491 | b |
In his complaint, Lay alleged that the prosecution was in fact terminated in his favor. We conclude that this argument was waived, and we therefore do not address it. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "553 A.2d 1078, 1081",
"parenthetical": "explaining that appellant bears burden of demonstrating how the trial court erred warranting reversal, and Supreme Court will not comb the record searching for error",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459,... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "752 A.2d 26, 33",
"parenthetical": "\"Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the trial court are not preserved for appeal.\"",
"sentence": "See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 459, 752 A.2d 26, 33 (2000) (“Contentions not raised or fairly presented to the tri... | 3,688,491 | b |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "902 F.2d 1098, 1104",
"parenthetical": "contempt involves maliciousness or lack of a good faith argument and belief that the party's actions were not in violation of a bankruptcy stay",
"sentence": "See [In re Crysen/Montenay Energy Co., 902 F.2d 1098, 1104 (2d Cir.1990)] (cont... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | 10,514,249 | a |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "550 F.2d 47, 51, 57",
"parenthetical": "allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney's fees under civil contempt powers for acts which bankruptcy judge found were done with \"knowledge\" of automatic stay and \"deliberate[ ]\" disregard of bankruptcy rules re... | 10,514,249 | b |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney's fees under civil contempt powers for acts which bankruptcy judge found were done with \"knowledge\" of automatic stay and \"deliberate[ ]\" disregard of bankruptcy rules regarding requireme... | 10,514,249 | b |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney's fees under civil contempt powers for acts which bankruptcy judge found were done with \"knowledge\" of automatic stay and \"deliberate[ ]\" disregard of bankruptcy rules regarding requireme... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | 10,514,249 | a |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney's fees under civil contempt powers for acts which bankruptcy judge found were done with \"knowledge\" of automatic stay and \"deliberate[ ]\" disregard of bankruptcy rules regarding requireme... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | 10,514,249 | a |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "889 F.2d 389, 394-95",
"parenthetical": "knowledge of violation and terms of injunction required to hold party in civil contempt",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976) (allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attor... | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | 10,514,249 | a |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "knowledge of violation and terms of injunction required to hold party in civil contempt",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976) (allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees under c... | 10,514,249 | b |
For other debtors [who are not "individuals"], contempt proceedings are the proper means of compensation and punishment for willful violations of the automatic stay. | {
"signal": "see also",
"identifier": "113 B.R. 279, 279",
"parenthetical": "recognizing power of bankruptcy court under SS 105 of the code and Bankruptcy Rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976)... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "knowledge of violation and terms of injunction required to hold party in civil contempt",
"sentence": "Investors v. Camelia Builders, Inc., 550 F.2d 47, 51, 57 (2d Cir.1976) (allowing imposition of costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees under c... | 10,514,249 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "463 U.S. 1049, 1049",
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify ... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "463 U.S. 1049, 1049",
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify ... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "463 U.S. 1049, 1049",
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify ... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "788 F.2d 544, 553",
"parenthetical": "finding that inventory search of car done on-the-spot was lawful because officer reasonably suspected that car contained gun and search was reasonable to ensure the immediate protection of the public's safety",
"sentence": "See Cady v. Domb... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "463 U.S. 1049, 1049",
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify ... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": "463 U.S. 1049, 1049",
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify ... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify protective search... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify protective search... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify protective search... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "788 F.2d 544, 553",
"parenthetical": "finding that inventory search of car done on-the-spot was lawful because officer reasonably suspected that car contained gun and search was reasonable to ensure the immediate protection of the public's safety",
"sentence": "See Cady v. Domb... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify protective search... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "no signal",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "protection of police and others can justify protective searches when police have a reasonable belief that the suspect poses a danger",
"sentence": "Long, 463 U.S. at 1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469 (protection of police and others can justify protective search... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | 4,016,666 | a |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "finding police officer's opening of car's trunk without warrant did not violate Fourth Amendment because officer reasonably believed trunk contained gun, trunk was vulnerable to intrusion by vandals, and public might be endangered if intruder removed gun",
... | 4,016,666 | b |
An action is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual officer's state of mind, "as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify [the] action." In the instant case, the agents' limited search for weapons was reasonable in order to ensure officer safety prior to Nishimura's access t... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": "788 F.2d 544, 553",
"parenthetical": "finding that inventory search of car done on-the-spot was lawful because officer reasonably suspected that car contained gun and search was reasonable to ensure the immediate protection of the public's safety",
"sentence": "See Cady v. Domb... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "6 F.3d 673, 680",
"parenthetical": "finding search without warrant of arrest ed defendant's tent in which officers believed there was a firearm not justified by need to protect public because officers could have prevented children from entering tent until warrant was obtained... | 4,016,666 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "518 Pa. 405, 415",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confessio... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "543 A.2d 1068, 1072",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "469 Pa. 342, 355",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Bec... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "365 A.2d 1237, 1244",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "246 Pa.Super. 132, 138",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a c... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "369 A.2d 846, 849",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | 903,251 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "518 Pa. 405, 415",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confessio... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "543 A.2d 1068, 1072",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "469 Pa. 342, 355",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Bec... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "365 A.2d 1237, 1244",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“... | 903,251 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "246 Pa.Super. 132, 138",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a c... | 903,251 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "369 A.2d 846, 849",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "518 Pa. 405, 415",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confessio... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "543 A.2d 1068, 1072",
"parenthetical": "introduction of statements made by lay witnesses regarding the voluntariness of a confession found to be harmless error",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | 903,251 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "469 Pa. 342, 355",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Bec... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "365 A.2d 1237, 1244",
"parenthetical": "curative instruction given following improper admission of statement regarding right to silence held sufficient not to require mistrial",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "246 Pa.Super. 132, 138",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a c... | 903,251 | a |
In contrast, cases applying the harmless error analysis to the introduction of presumptively coerced statements are legion. | {
"signal": "but see",
"identifier": "369 A.2d 846, 849",
"parenthetical": "recognizing that harmless error analysis is appropriate even if presumptively coerced confession is improperly introduced",
"sentence": "See e.g. Commonwealth v. Bullard, 465 Pa. 341, 349-350, 350 A.2d 797, 801 (1976) (“Because a confes... | {
"signal": "see",
"identifier": null,
"parenthetical": "holding that although Miranda required the suppression of \"testimonial\" statements made before defendant was advised of his constitutional rights, \"the state court is free, of course, to consider this [harmless error] question upon remand.\"",
"sentenc... | 903,251 | b |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.