From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Certiorari Denied

U.S.
Jun 24, 2002
536 U.S. 949 (2002)

Opinion

JUNE 24, 2002


No. 01-10349 SWINT v. UNITED STATES. C.A.3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 01-10350 SUMMERSETT v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 33 Fed. Appx. 993.

No. 01-10354 GOMEZ-ROMERO v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certioari denied. Reported below: 273 F.3d 393.

No. 01-10356 NORRIS v. UNITED STATES. C.A.2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 281 F.3d 357.

No. 01-10357 CARDENAS-LOPEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 01-10362 WALLACE v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 280 F.3d 781.

No. 01-10363 LEE v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 01-10364 LUALEMAGA, AKA SALE v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 280 F.3d 1260.

No. 01-10365 HILL v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 31 Fed. Appx. 95.

No. 01-10366 FRANCIS, AKA RAMSEY v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 29 Fed. Appx. 128.

No. 01-10371 CECENO v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 32 Fed. Appx. 127.

No. 01-10373 SANCHEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 32 Fed. Appx. 129.

No. 01-10376 JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 278 F.3d 749.

No. 01-10377 JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 32 Fed. Appx. 129.

No. 01-10378 LOPEZ-LOPEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 282 F.3d 1.


Summaries of

Certiorari Denied

U.S.
Jun 24, 2002
536 U.S. 949 (2002)
Case details for

Certiorari Denied

Case Details

Full title:CERTIORARI DENIED

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jun 24, 2002

Citations

536 U.S. 949 (2002)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Cent. Dist. of Cal.

The Interstate Agreement on Detainers ("IAD") is both a state law and a law of the United States. Carchman v.…

Ventura v. U.S.

Apprendi does not apply, however, to sentences within the applicable statutory maximum.United States v.…