Unpublished Decisions
U.S. v. Pinon-Ayon, 2010 WL 3277644 (8/20/10) (Wyo) (unpub'd) - The 10th grants the government's unopposed motion to vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing because the district court did not make specific and independent findings required to justify an obstruction of justice enhancement. Unfortunately, the opinion is short on details.
U.S. v. Espinoza, 2010 WL 3278043 (8/20/10) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - The government admits its Las Cruces office suppressed evidence that its chief witness ested positive for meth weeks before trial, when she insisted at trial she had given up meth. But the suppressed evidence was not material in light of the additional impeachment evidence that was offered at trial.
U.S. v. Ramos-Lopez, 2010 WL 3245245 (8/17/10) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - A defendant's request for the low end of the guideline range waives, not just forfeits, the argument on appeal that the court should have imposed a below-guideline-range sentence.
U.S. v. Gibler, 2010 WL 3245180 (8/16/10) (Kan) (unpub'd) - The 10th says in a footnote that in habeas cases counsel does not have to follow the Anders procedure, because the petitioner does not have the right to counsel. The 10th doesn't say what procedure counsel should follow.
Kersh v. Smeler, 2010 WL 3245313 (8/17/10) (Colo) (unpub'd) - The 10th rejects claim that an invisible human robot forced the petitioner to commit robberies.
U.S. v. Espinoza, 2010 WL 3278043 (8/20/10) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - The government admits its Las Cruces office suppressed evidence that its chief witness ested positive for meth weeks before trial, when she insisted at trial she had given up meth. But the suppressed evidence was not material in light of the additional impeachment evidence that was offered at trial.
U.S. v. Ramos-Lopez, 2010 WL 3245245 (8/17/10) (N.M.) (unpub'd) - A defendant's request for the low end of the guideline range waives, not just forfeits, the argument on appeal that the court should have imposed a below-guideline-range sentence.
U.S. v. Gibler, 2010 WL 3245180 (8/16/10) (Kan) (unpub'd) - The 10th says in a footnote that in habeas cases counsel does not have to follow the Anders procedure, because the petitioner does not have the right to counsel. The 10th doesn't say what procedure counsel should follow.
Kersh v. Smeler, 2010 WL 3245313 (8/17/10) (Colo) (unpub'd) - The 10th rejects claim that an invisible human robot forced the petitioner to commit robberies.
posted by Anonymous at 3:06 PM
<< Home