United States federal probation and supervised release (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "United States federal probation and supervised release" in English language version.

refsWebsite

Global rank English rank

71openjurist.org

low place

5,885^th place

32cornell.edu

332^nd place

246^th place

7ussc.gov

low place

6justia.com

696^th place

428^th place

3uscourts.gov

2,275^th place

1,288^th place

2scholar.google.com

1,697^th place

1,040^th place

1pewtrusts.org

low place

1findlaw.com

1,478^th place

868^th place

1nacdl.org

low place

1circuit6.blogspot.com

low place

1leagle.com

4,919^th place

2,808^th place

1web.archive.org

1^st place

1ndcalfpd.org

low place

1salisburypost.com

low place

9,444^th place

1lexology.com

low place

6,257^th place

1lexisnexis.com

8,367^th place

4,882^nd place

1ncjrs.gov

6,037^th place

3,633^rd place

1wsj.com

79^th place

65^th place

1ibls.com

low place

1justice.gov

918^th place

556^th place

1ssrn.com

703^rd place

501^st place

circuit6.blogspot.com

Martin, Benton, The long arm of supervised release, Federal Public Defender

cornell.edu

law.cornell.edu

findlaw.com

blogs.findlaw.com

US v. Hampton, No. 10-10035, 5th Cir., Filed: January 6, 2011. Revised January 31, 2011.

ibls.com

Martha L. Arias (July 12, 2009), Prohibition from Accessing the Internet as Defendant's Condition of Supervised Release

justia.com

supreme.justia.com

Ex Parte United States, 242 U.S. 27
Burns v. United States, 287 U.S. 216
Frad v. Kelly 302 U.S. 312
Johnson v. U.S., 529 U.S. 694 (2000), 700, 120 S. Ct. 1795, 1800.

law.justia.com

United States v. Weber, U.S. App. LEXIS 15111 (9th Cir. 2006).
Springer v. United States, 148 F2d 411 (CA9 Cal 1945).

justice.gov

Christopher M.E. Painter (March 2001), Supervised Release and Probation Restrictions in Hacker Cases

leagle.com

[1]^{[dead link]}

lexisnexis.com

litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com

Mary Lou Howard (1985), Charitable contributions as a condition of federal probation for corporate defendants: a controversial sanction under new law, Notre Dame Law Review

lexology.com

Lane Powell PC (March 17, 2010), United States Sentencing Commission issues proposed guidelines related to the sentencing of companies charged with federal crimes, Association of Corporate Counsel

nacdl.org

Morris, Douglas A. (November 2006), Representing a Client Charged With Violating Conditions of Supervised Release, Champion Magazine

ncjrs.gov

Glenn R. Schmitt (2007), Overview of Federal Criminal Cases, Fiscal Year 2007

ndcalfpd.org

Portman, Barry J., A Federal Case Timeline, Federal Public Defender

openjurist.org

United States v. Forbes, 172 F3d 675 (CA9 Cal 1999).
United States v. Iverson, 90 F3d 1340 (CA8 SD 1996).
United States v. Daiagi, 892 F2d (CA4 Md 1989).
United States v. Belgard, 894 F2d 1092 (CA9 Or 1990).
United States v. Mueller, 463 F3d 887 (CA9 Guam 2006).
United States v. Ellenbogen, 390 F2d 537 (CA2 NY 1968).
United States v. Bynoe, 562 F2d 126 (CA1 Mass 1977).
Bryson v. United States, 265 F2d 9 (CA9 1959).
United States v. Wiley, 267 F2d 453 (CA7 Ill 1959).
United States v. Martin, 363 F3d 25 (CA1 Mass 2004).
United States v. Aspinall, 389 F.3d 332 (2d Cir. 2004).
United States v. McNeil, 415 F3d 273 (CA2 NY 2005).
United States v. Hammonds, 370 F3d 1032 (CA10 Okla 2004).
United States v. Krabbenhoft, 998 F2d 591 (CA8 ND 1993).
United States v. Miqbel, 444 F3d 1173 (CA9 Cal 2006).
United States v. Stiefel, 207 F3d 256 (CA5 Tex 2000).
United States v. Merced, 263 F3d 34 (CA2 NY 2001).
United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers, F3d 961 (App DC 1998).
Driver v. United States, 232 F2d 418 (CA4 Va 1956).
Gaddis v. United States, 280 F2d 334 (CA6 Ohio 1960).
United States v. Consuelo-Gonzalez, 521 F2d 259 (CA9 Cal 1975).
United States v. Miller, 549 F2d 105 (CA9 Cal 1976).
United States v. Dane, 570 F2d 840 (CA9 Ariz 1977).
United States v. Kahl, 583 F2d 1351 (CA5 Tex 1978).
United States v. Mancuso, 444 F2d 691 (CA5 La 1971).
United States v. Shelby, 573 F2d 971 (CA7 Wis 1978).
United States v. Smith, 414 F2d 630 (5th Cir. May 14, 1969).
U.S. v. Myers, 426 F3d 117 (2005).
United States v. Warren, 186 F3d 358 (CA3 NJ 1999).
United States v. Gordon, 540 F2d 452 (CA9 Cal 1976).
United States v. Stoural, 990 F2d 372 (CA8 Neb 1993).
United States v. Monteiro, 270 F3d 465 (CA7 Ill 2001).
United States v. Peete, 919 F2d 1168 (CA6 Tenn 1990).
United States v. Tonry, 605 F.2d 144, 148 (5th Cir. 1979).
United States v. Clovis Retail Liquor Dealers Trade Association, 540 F2d 1389 (CA10 NM 1976).
United States v. Hoffman, 415 F2d 14 (CA7 Ill 1969).
United States v. Boswell, 565 F2d 1338 (CA5 Miss 1978).
United States v. Buechler, 557 F2d 1002 (CA3 NJ 1977).
United States v. Daddato, 996 F2d 903 (CA7 Wis 1993).
United States v. Stout, 32 F3d 901 (CA5 La 1994).
United States v. Santarpio, 560 F2d 448 (CA1 Mass 1977).
Hensley v. United States, 257 F2d 681 (CA5 Ga 1958).
United States v. Paulton, 540 F2d 886 (CA8 SD 1976).
United States v. Ramsey yes all the time, 992 F.2d 831 (8th Cir. Mo. 1993).
United States v. Smith, 436 F3d 307 (CA1 Mass 2006).
United States v. Showalter, 933 F2d 573 (CA7 Ind 1991).
United States v. Schave, 186 F3d 839 (CA7 Ill 1999).
United States v. Ross, 476 F3d 719 (CA9 Wash 2007).
Malone v. United States, 502 F.2d 554, 555 (9th Cir. 1974).
Porth v. Templar, 453 f2d 330 (CA10 Kan 1971).
United States v. Peterson, 248 F3d 79 (CA2 NY 2001).
United States v. Carter, 159 F3d 397 (CA9 Cal 1998).
United States v. Stephenson, 928 F2d 728 (CA6 Tenn 1991).
United States v. Iversen, 90 F3d 1340 (CA8 SD 1996).
United States v. Doe, 79 F3d 1309 (CA2 NY 1996).
United States v. Barajas, 331 F3d 1141 (CA10 Kan 2003).
United States v. Lakatos, 241 F3d 690 (CA9 Cal 2001).
United States v. Chavez, 204 F3d 1305 (CA11 Ala 2000).
United States v. Pierce, 561 F2d 735 (CA9 Cal 1977).
United States v. Kosth, 943 F2d 798 (CA7 Ill 1991).
United States v. Voda, 994 F2d 149 (CA5 Tex 1993).
U.S. v. Lifshitz, 369 F3d 173 (2nd Cir. 2004).
U.S. v. Russell Lane Walker, 275 F3d 981 (10th Cir. December 28, 2001).
U.S. v. Zinn, 321 F3d 1084 (10th Cir. February 14, 2003).
United States v. Freeman, 316 F.3d 386 (3d Cir. 2003).
U.S. v. Softsky, 287 F.3d 122 (2002).
United States v. White, 244 F.3d 1199 (10th Cir. 2001).
United States v. Jalilian, 896 F2d 447 (CA10 Okla 1990).
U.S. v. Smith, 972 F2d 960 (CA8 Mo 1992).
United States v. Bello, 310 F3d 56 (CA2 NY 2002).
United States v. Coatoam, 245 F3d 553 (CA6 Ohio 2001).

pewtrusts.org

"Number of Offenders on Federal Supervised Release Hits All-Time High". 24 January 2017.

salisburypost.com

Shavonne Potts (March 19, 2010), Speakers promote cannabis for health, Salisbury Post

scholar.google.com

Cooper v. United States, 91 F2d 195 (CA5 La 1937).
Davis v. Parker, 293 F Supp 1388 (DC Del 1968).

ssrn.com

papers.ssrn.com

Rosenberg, Isaac B. (2008), Involuntary Endogenous RFID Compliance Monitoring as a Condition of Federal Supervised Release - Chips Ahoy?, vol. 10, Yale Journal of Law & Technology, p. 331, SSRN 1079106

uscourts.gov

ca11.uscourts.gov

"Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-08. Retrieved 2010-06-30.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)

uscourts.gov

"Appendix: Standard Condition Language (Probation and Supervised Release Conditions)". US Courts. United States Judiciary. Retrieved May 2, 2023.

ca3.uscourts.gov

U.S. v. Heckman, 08-3844 (3d Cir. Jan 11, 2010).

ussc.gov

§5D1.3. Conditions of Supervised Release, USSG
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4 (2012)
U.S.S.G. § 5B1.1 (2012)
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1 (2012)
U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3 (2012)
U.S.S.G. § 5D1.1 (2012)
U.S.S.G. § 5D1.2 (2012)

web.archive.org

"Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-08. Retrieved 2010-06-30.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)

wsj.com

Efrati, Amir (August 13, 2009), Courts Face Growing Battle Over Limits on Ex-Convicts, The Wall Street Journal