Ninth Circuit· 9/2/1994
Mario Garcia v. William Bunnell
Citations
- 33 F.3d 1193
- 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6740
- 94 Daily Journal DAR 12444
- 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 23877
- 1994 WL 472081
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reviewing conflict of interest claim in habeas petition as a mixed question of fact and law subject to de novo review
- relying on district court's hearing on conflict
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wiggins, Brunetti
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
62 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Mickens v. TaylorSupreme Court· 2002-03-27· cited 1,451×
- Gilbrook v. City of WestminsterNinth Circuit· 1999-05-21· cited 435×
- State v. DhaliwalWashington Supreme Court· 2003-11-20· cited 297×
- State v. RichieHawaii Supreme Court· 1998-08-03· cited 243×
- Earp v. OrnoskiNinth Circuit· 2005-09-07· cited 209×
- Betty Lou Beets v. Wayne Scott, Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional DivisionFifth Circuit· 1995-09-22· cited 186×
- United States v. Carl Dexter MooreNinth Circuit· 1998-09-23· cited 166×
- Jose Enrique Alberni v. E.K. McDaniel Frankie Sue Del Papa State of NevadaNinth Circuit· 2006-08-09· cited 142×
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Ramon MARTINEZ, Defendant-AppellantNinth Circuit· 1998-05-12· cited 102×
- Ceja v. StewartNinth Circuit· 1996-10-08· cited 81×
- Kevin Washington v. Robert O. LampertNinth Circuit· 2005-09-06· cited 75×
- State v. LovelaceIdaho Supreme Court· 2003-11-20· cited 62×
- Daniel Lee Lewis v. D.A. MayleNinth Circuit· 2004-11-29· cited 61×
- Donald M. PARADIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. A.J. ARAVE, Warden, Idaho State Penitentiary, Respondent-AppelleeNinth Circuit· 1997-11-20· cited 59×
- United States v. Christopher VialvaFifth Circuit· 2014-08-11· cited 58×
- United States v. Jane Doe (r.s.w.)Ninth Circuit· 1998-02-12· cited 53×
- United States v. MettNinth Circuit· 1995-09-19· cited 50×
- United States v. CruzNinth Circuit· 1997-09-19· cited 39×
- State v. ReganCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2008-02-26· cited 35×
- Richard Clark v. Kevin ChappellNinth Circuit· 2019-09-05· cited 35×
Cites
19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1981-06-22· cited 6,931×
- Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court· 1980-05-12· cited 5,389×
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1932-11-07· cited 4,979×
- Holloway v. ArkansasSupreme Court· 1978-04-03· cited 2,478×
- Burger v. KempSupreme Court· 1987-09-21· cited 1,706×
- Wood v. GeorgiaSupreme Court· 1981-03-04· cited 1,161×
- Sheldon Sanders v. John Ratelle, Warden Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of the State of CaliforniaNinth Circuit· 1994-04-04· cited 370×
- United States of America, and Lummi Indian Tribe, Intervenor-Appellant v. State of WashingtonNinth Circuit· 1992-06-30· cited 222×
- Dennis Rosa Collazo v. Wayne Estelle, Warden, California Mens ColonyNinth Circuit· 1991-07-18· cited 204×
- Guenter Mannhalt v. Amos E. ReedNinth Circuit· 1988-05-25· cited 179×
- Lummi Indian Tribe v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1993-04-26· cited 86×
- United States v. UnruhNinth Circuit· 1987-09-03· cited 84×
- United States v. Robert J. MiskinisNinth Circuit· 1992-04-10· cited 75×
- United States v. Larry L. HortonSeventh Circuit· 1988-04-26· cited 73×
- B. E. Rock Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court· 1991-12-16· cited 67×
- Lawtis Donald Rhoden v. James Rowland, Director, California Department of CorrectionsNinth Circuit· 1993-11-29· cited 61×
- United States v. Arthur Andrew AllenNinth Circuit· 1987-11-09· cited 39×
- United States v. Andrew JenkinsSecond Circuit· 1991-08-13· cited 33×
- Charlie M. Jamison v. A.L. LockhartEighth Circuit· 1992-09-24· cited 32×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.