United States v. James Alvin Rhodes, A/K/A Mickey Rhodes, United States of America v. Garvey Martin Cheek, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that officer’s question, “Why?,” in response to defendant’s spontaneous statement, “You can’t take that,” made during the execution of a search warrant, did not amount to interrogation
• requiring only “simple matching” of facts against Solem principles where the sentence is for a term of years
• allowing evidence of defendant's prior cocaine convictions to refute claim that he lacked intent to commit drug offenses
• Defense counsel’s cross-examination of government witnesses put in issue the defendant’s intent, thereby rendering earlier convictions of the same crime of sufficient probative value to outweigh the prejudicial effect of their admission.
• Defense counsel's cross-examination of government witnesses put in issue the defendant's intent, thereby rendering earlier convictions of the same crime of sufficient probative value to outweigh the prejudicial effect of their admission.
• “To the extent then that [the defendant] defended on the ground that he was present but innocent, he placed his intent in issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).