TEJEDA-MATA
v.
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE
TEJEDA-MATA
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE
456 U.S. 994
Supreme Court of the United States (1982)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Montoya, 827 F.2d 143 (7th Cir. 1987)…v. Manfredi, 722 F. 2d 519, 524 (9th Cir.1983); United States v. Howell, 719 F. 2d 1258, 1262 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1228, 104 S.Ct. 2683, 81 L.Ed.2d 878 (1984); United States v. Gonzalez, 671 F. 2d 441, 443-44 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 994, 102 S.Ct. 2279, 73 L.Ed.2d 1291 (1982); United States v. Nance, 666 F. 2d 353, 360 n. 18 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 918, 102 S.Ct. 1776, 72 L.Ed.2d 179 (1982); United States v. New Buffalo Amusement Corp., 600 F. 2d 368, 376 (2d Cir. 1979).…
-
United States v. Bear, 828 F.2d 1286 (8th Cir. 1987)…7) (holding the evidence insufficient to convict defendant of conspiracy to distribute heroin, this court observed, “Surmise cannot be permitted in a criminal case”); see also United States v. Wilson, 665 F. 2d 825, 830 (8th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 994, 102 S.Ct. 2279, 73 L.Ed.2d 1291 (1982). As we noted in United States v. Knife, 592 F. 2d 472 (8th Cir.1979), “[w]e are well aware that the standard to be applied by an appellate court in determining sufficiency of the evidence is a strict one and…1 / 2