Tenth Circuit· 12/28/2005
United States v. Cherry
Citations
- 433 F.3d 698
- 69 Fed. R. Serv. 84
- 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 28795
- 2005 WL 3541080
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that a prior conviction for using a communications device to facilitate the distribution of cocaine was admissible under Rule 404(b) to prove that the defendant had the requisite intent to distribute cocaine
- noting that five-year-old drug-distribution conviction was relevant to subsequent drug-distribution charge when defendant had been in 44 prison during intervening years and “obviously had no opportunity to commit other distribution offenses”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tacha, Holloway, Hartz
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. Aumbrey WinsteadD.C. Circuit· 2018-05-25· cited 82×
- United States v. MoranTenth Circuit· 2007-09-25· cited 80×
- United States v. KaramTenth Circuit· 2007-08-07· cited 70×
- United States v. WatsonTenth Circuit· 2014-09-11· cited 63×
- United States v. BrooksTenth Circuit· 2013-08-16· cited 59×
- United States v. McGlothinTenth Circuit· 2013-01-24· cited 43×
- United States v. Cardinas GarciaTenth Circuit· 2010-02-23· cited 39×
- United States v. Esquivel-RiosTenth Circuit· 2013-08-02· cited 36×
- United States v. MadkinsTenth Circuit· 2017-08-08· cited 35×
- United States v. BanksTenth Circuit· 2018-03-06· cited 33×
- United States v. DouganTenth Circuit· 2012-07-10· cited 29×
- United States v. EdwardsTenth Circuit· 2008-09-03· cited 25×
- United States v. WillistonTenth Circuit· 2017-07-05· cited 25×
- United States v. HenthornTenth Circuit· 2017-07-26· cited 19×
- Leon v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.D. New Mexico· 2016-02-01· cited 11×
- United States v. HuskeyTenth Circuit· 2007-09-18· cited 9×
- United States v. VenenoTenth Circuit· 2024-03-07· cited 5×
- United States v. EspinozaTenth Circuit· 2007-01-10· cited 3×
- United States v. RodellaD. New Mexico· 2015-04-21· cited 1×
- United States v. ShirleyD. New Mexico· 2016-10-15· cited 1×
Cites
21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court· 2004-10-01· cited 23,210×
- Huddleston v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1988-05-02· cited 2,215×
- United States v. Timothy Moses JohnsonSixth Circuit· 1994-07-12· cited 209×
- United States v. Livan Alfonso RaadEleventh Circuit· 2005-04-21· cited 178×
- United States v. Antonio Hernandez, Hector Giral, Yolanda BautaEleventh Circuit· 1990-04-16· cited 104×
- United States v. BeckerTenth Circuit· 2000-10-31· cited 87×
- United States v. Leo Adams, United States of America v. Carl ParkerEighth Circuit· 2005-03-22· cited 87×
- United States v. Earl K. ShumwayTenth Circuit· 1997-05-06· cited 81×
- United States v. Iris Collette Jackson Dwight Dean JacksonTenth Circuit· 2000-06-02· cited 81×
- United States v. Mark CarterTenth Circuit· 1992-07-20· cited 80×
- United States v. PaytonTenth Circuit· 2005-05-04· cited 70×
- United States v. Andrew A. ChavisSeventh Circuit· 2005-11-09· cited 68×
- United States v. SegienTenth Circuit· 1997-05-28· cited 65×
- Arons v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of DelawareSupreme Court· 2000-12-04· cited 65×
- United States v. Luis Santiago RamirezTenth Circuit· 1995-08-08· cited 64×
- United States v. Albert John Blair, Jr.Tenth Circuit· 1995-05-01· cited 54×
- United States v. BrooksTenth Circuit· 1998-11-12· cited 49×
- United States v. Marvin SmithSixth Circuit· 2005-08-18· cited 37×
- United States v. BermudezFirst Circuit· 2005-05-23· cited 29×
- United States v. Eleno AguirreTenth Circuit· 1997-03-11· cited 23×
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.