Sealed v. Sealed

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding for similar reasons that the burdens for § 4246’s modification and revocation provisions must match
• “A contumacious person could violate release conditions yet continually relitigate against commitment under subsection (d)’s clear and convincing proof standard.”
• “[W]e hold that the fair preponderance of evidence standard, not challenged as the standard appropriate to decide whether the violative conduct occurred, also applies to the twin finding of a substantial risk of harm.”
• interpreting the analogous section 4246(f) revocation statute
• applying preponderance-of-evidence standard to § 4246(f) revocation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Terrence Mitchell
  Fifth Circuit· 2013-02-18· cited 36×
• United States v. Christopher Perkins
  Fourth Circuit· 2023-05-04· cited 6×
• United States v. Richard Austin Williams
  Sixth Circuit· 2023-06-12· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Addington v. Texas
  Supreme Court· 1979-04-30· cited 3,004×
• O'Connor v. Donaldson
  Supreme Court· 1975-06-26· cited 1,231×
• Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey
  Supreme Court· 1988-12-12· cited 736×
• Perry Moss, Jr., and Rosalind E. Moss v. Ole South Real Estate, Inc., Perry Moss, Jr., and Rosalind E. Moss v. Ole South Real Estate, Inc.
  Fifth Circuit· 1991-06-26· cited 101×
• United States v. Frank Grandlund
  Fifth Circuit· 1996-01-10· cited 90×
• United States v. Lykes Bros. Steamship Co., Inc., in Personam, and the Ss Thompson Lykes, Her Engines, Tackle, Etc., in Rem
  Fifth Circuit· 1970-10-06· cited 18×