Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL ORDER BRADEN, Judge. I. RELEVANT FACTS1 AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY. On June 30, 1993, Edwin M. Ackerman (“Plaintiff’) enlisted in the United States Army (“Army”) for a term of three years, with a discharge date of June 29, 1996. Gov’t App. at A-l. In 1994, Plaintiff pled guilty to charges of rape and larceny. Gov’t App. at A-3. The

No opinion found. Click here to view source material.

Notice is hereby given that a motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 USCS § 1651, which this Court construed as petition for extraordinary relief, was filed under Rule 27(a) by mail on August 1, 2011, and placed on docket this 14th day of February, 2012. On consideration thereof, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0095p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ GREGORY ACKERMAN, │ Plai

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PETER ACKERMAN and JOANNE LEEDOM-ACKERMAN, Plaintiffs, Civil Action 08-00279 (HHK) v. Civil Action 08-00722 (HHK) Civil Action 08-01136 (HHK) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

643 F.Supp.2d 140 (2009) Peter ACKERMAN and Joanne Leedom-Ackerman, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Civil Action Nos. 08-00279 (HHK), 08-00722 (HHK). 08-01136 (HHK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. August 18, 2009. *142 James P. Joseph, Rebecca Lynne Dubin Gordon, Arnold & Porter LLP, W

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LESTER P. ACKERMAN, IV, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 26-00277 (UNA) )

324 F.Supp.2d 1 (2004) David A. ACKERMAN, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES and Colin L. Powell, Defendants. No. CIV.A. 01-01901 (HHK). United States District Court, District of Columbia. July 12, 2004. *2 Bridget Read Mugane, Columbia, MD, for Plaintiff. Mark E. Nagle, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, Marina Utgoff Bras

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 23-1298 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Darren James Ackerman

ERIC F. MELGREN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is again before the Court on Defendant Walter Ackerman's Motion to Suppress (Doc. 19). Defendant seeks the suppression of an email and its attachments arguing that they were obtained through an illegal search and seizure. This Court originally denied Defendant's Motion to Suppress finding that AOL and the National Center for Missing and Exploited

OPINION BRUGGINK, Judge, This case is before the court on the Government’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendant contends that the plaintiffs’ exclusive method for resolving overtime pay disputes under the Fair Labor Standards Act is the grievance procedure of their union’s collective bargaining agreement. The issue is whether, in the circumstances of t

GORSUCH, Circuit Judge, delivered the opinion of the Court, in which PHILLIPS, J., joined. HARTZ, J., joined Parts I, II, III(A), and IV. Walter Ackerman’s email never made it to its intended recipient. It didn’t because AOL, Mr. Ackerman’s internet service provider (ISP), has an automated filter designed to thwart the transmission of child pornography. Aft

Frank J. Bailey, United States Bankruptcy Judge By its complaint in the above-captioned adversary proceeding, the Elizabeth W. Ackerman Trust U/A/D 12/18/1967 ("the Trust"), by and through its co-trustees, Lawrence Litvak and Timothy R.J. Mehrtens, seeks a determination that certain unliquidated and disputed liability of the defendant and chapter 7 debtor, Jeffrey Ross Ackerman ("Jeffrey" or "the Debtor"), a former trustee of the T

MEMORANDUM * Joseph Donald Ackerman (“Ackerman”) appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, having reserved the right to appeal therefrom in his guilty plea to Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We affirm. Montana Patrol Officer Lafe Keith (“Officer Keith”) observed Ackerman traveling eastbound on Interstate 90 toward M

MEMORANDUM ** Leslie Eric Ackerman appeals his 180-month sentence for aggravated sexual assault. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm. Ackerman’s sentence was reasonable. The district court articulated circumstances that, under 18 U.S.C. § 3558(a), justified a sentence in excess of the advisory Guidelines range. The “appalling” nature of the crime, the very tender age

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LESTER P. ACKERMAN, IV Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 25 - 4385 (LLA) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the court is Plaintiff Lester P. Ackerman IV’s complaint, ECF No. 1, and motion to proceed in forma pauperis,

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department denied.

MEMORANDUM * Stanley Ackerman appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress and his motions for judgment of acquittal, and the district court’s refusal to make a downward adjustment in his sentence for acceptance of responsibility. Because the facts are known to the parties, we do not recite them here. We affirm. 1. Denial of Motion to Suppress Statement

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Indiana denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.