SMITH

v.

VIRGINIA

Citator

Cited By (14 total)

• Marshall v. United States, 414 U.S. 417 (U.S. 1974)
  …t likely to respond to treatment and held that Congress could not be said to have acted irrationally in so doing. The District Court's denial of petitioner’s motion to vacate his sentence was affirmed, 470 F. 2d 34 (CA9 1972). We granted certiorari, 410 U. S. 954 (1973). We agree with the District Court’s and the Court of Appeals’ reading of the statute and affirm. (2) Petitioner concedes that the concept of equal protection as embodied in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, see Bolling v. Sharp…
• United States v. Winter, 663 F.2d 1120 (1st Cir. 1981)
  …Appellants claim that they were entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the new trial motions. [*1155] We think it clear that the standard for review is abuse of discretion. United States v. Zannino, 468 F. 2d 1299, 1303 (1st Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 954, 93 S.Ct. 1419, 35 L.Ed.2d 687 (1973). Even if, however, we were to accept appellants’ argument that somehow the requirements of 28 U.S.C. 2255 applied, an evidentiary hearing would not be mandated. [I]f the claim is based upon facts with which the…
• Bradley v. Milliken, 484 F.2d 215 (6th Cir. 1973)
  …for 180 regular days of instruction during the current school year.) On February 27, 1973, the Supreme Court denied review in Bloomfield Hills School District v. Roth, West Bloomfield School District v. Roth, and Birmingham School District v. Roth, 410 U.S. 954, 93 S.Ct. 1418, 35 L.Ed. 2d 687. In these cases this court had denied applications for writs of mandamus or prohibition against District Judge Roth. The School Districts contended that the District Judge usurped [*218] jurisdiction by failing to con…