From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Neal

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 573
Jan 10, 2008
263 F. App'x 572 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 07-16775.

Submitted January 7, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed January 10, 2008.

Ann Birmingham Scheel, Esq., USPX-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Denard Darnell Neal, USPA-U.S. Penitentiary, Atwater, CA, for Defendants-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Robert C. Broomfield, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-90-00003-RCB.

Before: O'SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN and GRABER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


A review of the record and appellant's response to the court's order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's order denying appellant's post-judgment motion for release.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Neal

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 573
Jan 10, 2008
263 F. App'x 572 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

U.S. v. Neal

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff — Appellee, v. Denard Darnell NEAL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 573

Date published: Jan 10, 2008

Citations

263 F. App'x 572 (9th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

Neal v. U.S.

Further, construing another of petitioner's section 2255 motions as a writ of mandamus, the Ninth Circuit…

Neal v. J. C. Streeval

As a prior court has held in dismissing a previous submission from Neal, “the questions raised . . . are so…