Young v. Conway

How courts have described this case

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

• “[Young] 7 emphasizes that he is ‘arguing that his lineup was illegal, not suggestive, therefore he is 8 under the [Wade] standards and not the standard set forth in Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 9 [1972].’”
• “[Young] 7 emphasizes that he is ‘arguing that his lineup was illegal, not suggestive, therefore he is 8 under the [Wade] standards and not the standard set forth in Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 9 [1972].’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Young v. Conway
  Second Circuit· 2012-10-16· cited 57×
• Young v. Conway
  Second Circuit· 2013-04-23· cited 12×
• YOUNG, RUDOLPH, PEOPLE v
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2016-05-06
• People v. Young
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2016-05-06