Cases

On order of the Chief Justice, the separate motions of defendants-appellees to extend the time for filing their answers to the application for leave to appeal are GRANTED. The answers will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before June 7, 2018.

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 15, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROYCE C. LAMBERTH, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Dkt. #26] pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Because defendants have presented matters outside of the pleadings which the Court has considered, the motion is treated

CALABRESI, Circuit Judge, concurring: This is one of the rare cases in which a habeas petitioner may well be innocent. Cf Henry J. Friendly, Is Innocence Irrelevant? Collateral Attack on Criminal Judgments, 38 U. Chi. L.Rev. 142, 148 (1970) (fearing for “the unusual case of the innocent man” in danger of “being burdened by so much dross in the [habeas] process”). Hawthorne was convicted sol

276 S.W.3d 916 (2009) STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Charles G. HAWTHORNE, Defendant-Appellant. No. SD 29036. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two. February 19, 2009. David B. Smith, Asst. Public Defender, Springfield, for Appellant. Darrell L. Moore, Pros. Atty., Joseph E. Knipp, Asst. Pros. Atty., Springfield, for Responde

LOLLEY, J. |, The defendant, Tommy Hawthorne, appeals a judgment by the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court, Parish of Webster, State of Louisiana, following his guilty plea of aggravated burglary. He was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment at hard labor. Hawthorne’s appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along with an Anders brief in support of the motion.1 The state has

46 Cal.4th 67 (2009) ___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___ ___ P.3d ___ THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CARLOS ANTHONY HAWTHORNE, Defendant and Appellant. No. S064769. Supreme Court of California. April 23, 2009. *72 Lynne S. Coffin and Michael J. Hersek, State Public Defenders, under appoin

OPINION McKEE, Circuit Judge. Luticia Hawthorne appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Postmaster General on her claims of race and disability discrimination. We will affirm. Inasmuch as the District Court has set forth the factual and procedural history of this case, we find it unnecessary to repeat that history here. See Hawthorne v. Potter, 2006 W

24 Cal.Rptr.3d 189 (2005) 35 Cal.4th 40 105 P.3d 552 In re Anderson HAWTHORNE, Jr., on Habeas Corpus. No. S116670. Supreme Court of California. February 10, 2005. Rehearing Denied March 16, 2005.[*] *191 Maria E. Stratton, Federal Public Defender, Sean Kennedy an

Appellant Hawthorne was charged by indictment with armed robbery and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence ("PFCV"). A jury found him guilty of PFCV as charged, and on the armed robbery count it found him guilty of the lesser included offense of robbery. On appeal from the judgment of conviction, appellant argues that the trial court erred (1) by raising sua sponte the issue of whether the government wished it to instruct the jury on the lesser included

Order entered May 17, 2016 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00042-CV CLB PARTNERS, LTD., CLB HOLDINGS, LLC, CLB HAWTHORNE RESIDENCES, LP, CLB HAWTHORNE RESIDENCES GP, LLC, AND PASEO DE MISSION HILLS, LLC, Appellants V. WINSTEAD, P.C

Per Curiam. Appellant, Johnny Ray Hawthorne, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion for a rule on the clerk. We treat this motion as a motion for belated appeal. His attorney, John F. Stroud, III, admits in his motion that the filing of the notice of appeal was premature due to a mistake on his part. We find that such an error, admittedly made by the attorney for a criminal defendant, is good cau

The opinion of the court was delivered by KESTIN, P.J.A.D. After a trial, plaintiffs claims for relief on account of her allegedly wrongful termination from her employment with defendant Borough of Hawthorne were rejected. The trial judge dismissed her claim against the municipality, holding that no violation of the Optional Municipal Charter Law (the Faulkner Act), N.J.S.A. 40:69A-1 to -210, had be

OPINION OF THE COURT Allan L. Winick, J. In this civil forfeiture action commenced pursuant to CPLR article 13-A, plaintiff, Denis Dillon, the District Attorney of Nassau County, as claiming authority, moves for an order granting him summary judgment awarding him a money judgment-in the amount of $4,250. Said amount representing the purported value of the instrumentality of a crime, an

790 N.E.2d 832 (2003) 204 Ill.2d 243 274 Ill.Dec. 59 Sonya D. HAWTHORNE, Appellee, v. The VILLAGE OF OLYMPIA FIELDS et al., Appellants. No. 93462. Supreme Court of Illinois. April 17, 2003. *834 John B. Murphey and Judith N. Kolman, of Rosenthal, Murphey & Coblentz, Chicago, for

556 S.E.2d 912 (2001) 252 Ga. App. 771 HAWTHORNE GRADING & HAULING v. RAMPLEY. No. A01A1900. Court of Appeals of Georgia. December 4, 2001. Anthony J. Morgese, Roswell, for appellant. Brock, Clay, Calhoun, Wilson & Rogers, Richard W. Calhoun, John K. Wells, Marietta, for appellee. ELLINGTON, Judge. Hawthorne Gradi

PER CURIAM: Plaintiffs appeal orders of the district court denying remand and joinder of a party and an order granting summary judgment for defendants. We affirm. I In 1965, Hugh Hawthorne purchased a tract of land in St. James Parish, Louisiana. Soon after buying the. land, Hawthorne conveyed a servitude to defendant Texas Brine

JUSTICE QUINN, specially concurring in part and dissenting in part: I concur in part and dissent in part. The majority correctly notes that, as a non-home-rule municipality, Olympia Fields possesses only those powers which are specifically conferred by the Illinois Cons

25 F.3d 1039NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Linville W. HAWTHORNE, Plaintiff Appellant,v.Ron GREGORY, Commissioner of the West Virginia Department ofCorrections; R. Michael Mangum, Sheriff of Raleigh County;

W. EUGENE DAVIS, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff, Hawthorne Land Company (“Hawthorne”) appeals the district court’s judgment granting a summary judgment to Equilon Pipeline Company (“Equilon”) and the United States Department of Energy (the “Government”). The district court concluded that Hawthorne’s donation of a pipeline right-of-way to the Government contained no restriction which w