Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “McCline v. United States”
McCline v. Eppspublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
McCline v. Eppspublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
United States v. McClinepublic domain
OPINION OF THE COURT KUCERA, Senior Judge: Consistent with his pleas, appellant was found guilty by a military judge sitting as a general court-martial of absence without leave, larceny of mail and false swearing in violation of Articles 86 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 886 and 934 (1982). Appellant now asserts that his plea of guilty to the specification of false swearing was im
United States v. McClinepublic domain
Opinion of the Court SULLIVAN, Chief Judge: On February 15, 1989, appellant was tried by a general court-martial composed of a military judge alone at Fort Hood, Texas. Consistent with his pleas, he was found guilty of absence without leave, larceny of mail, and false swearing, in violation of Articles 86 and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 886 and 934, respectively. The military j
McCline v. Keeneypublic domain
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
McCline v. Keeneypublic domain
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
McCline v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervisionpublic domain
SCHUMAN, J. The Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (board) postponed petitioner’s parole release date after finding that he had a severe emotional disturbance and that he posed a threat to the health or safety of the community. Petitioner seeks judicial review. At issue is whether the board’s action violated a federal court injunction or exceeded the board’s statutory authority. We conclude that it did neither, and we
People v. McClinepublic domain
Per Curiam. Defendant appeals as of right from his conviction, following a jury trial, of delivery of more than 650 grams of cocaine, MCL 333.7401(2) (a)(i); MSA 14.15(7401)(2)(a)(i). On January 4, 1989, defendant received the statutorily mandated sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Defendant’s conviction arises out of the sale of a kilogram of cocaine to undercover police officers an
People v. McClinepublic domain
Per Curiam. Early in the defendant’s jury trial, before any testimony was taken, a new judge was substituted. The Court of Appeals found the substitution to be reversible error. Because the defendant was not prejudiced by this substitution, his conviction should not have been reversed. We vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the Court of Appeals for further consideration of the defendant’s remaining
United States Ex Rel. McCline v. Meyeringpublic domain
FITZHENRY, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from an order of the District Court discharging the writ of habeas corpus and remanding the relator, Leander-McCline, to the custody of William D. Meyering, sheriff of Cook county, 111., to be delivered to the agent of the state of Ten*717nessee. Appellant had been detained by a
McCline (George Earl) v. Keeney (j.c.)public domain
829 F.2d 40 McCline (George Earl)v.Keeney (J.C.) NO. 87-3644 United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. SEP 16, 1987 1 Appeal From: D.Or. 2 AFFIRMED.
State v. McClinepublic domain
109 Ariz. 569 (1973) 514 P.2d 490 STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Robin Jo McCLINE, Appellant. No. 2354. Supreme Court of Arizona, In Banc. September 26, 1973. Gary K. Nelson, Atty. Gen. by Thomas A. Jacobs, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee. Thomas W. Foster, Phoenix, for appellant. HOLOHAN, Justice. After a trial b
833 F.2d 1016 McCline (George Earl)v.Oregon State Penitentiary, Correction Division NO. 86-4274 United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. NOV 16, 1987 1 Appeal From: D.Or. 2
United States v. Bulgerpublic domain
SULLIVAN, Chief Judge (concurring): I agree with Judge Wiss’ resolution of this case. Nevertheless, I believe some additional comments are warranted with respect to appellant’s legal attacks on his conviction of larceny of military allowances.1 He argued before the court below that he should not have been convicted of stealing the above military allowances, “since entitlement to
United States v. Jonespublic domain
Opinion of the Court SULLIVAN, Chief Judge: On March 22, 1991, appellant was tried at Fort Ord, California, before a military judge sitting alone as a general court-martial. Pursuant to his pleas, he was found guilty of absence without leave (AWOL) (2 days) terminated by apprehension and wrongful appropriation of a vehicle, in violation of Articles 86 and 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U
United States v. Smithpublic domain
*320 Opinion of the Court SULLIVAN, Chief Judge: During December 1989 and January-1990, appellant was tried by a military judge sitting as a general court-martial at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. In accordance with his pleas, he was found guilty of attempted sodomy with a child, two specifications of rape, three specifications of sodomy, three s
People Ex Rel. McCline v. Meyeringpublic domain
This cause comes here by writ of error to review the judgment of the criminal court of Cook county quashing a writ ofhabeas corpus. The proceedings are under section 2 of chapter 60, known as the Fugitives From Justice act. (Smith's Stat. 1933, p. 1541.) August 5, 1933, plaintiff in error filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus for his release. He had been arrested upon a fugitive warrant. Thereafter the Governor of Illinois issued a rendition warrant directed to any
McCline v. Statepublic domain
On January 14, 1911, the grand jury of Falls County, Texas, indicted the appellant for the murder of Rosa Tubbs, alleged to have been committed on September 6, 1910. The term of court at which the indictment was returned convened in January 9, 1911. The law requires, and we assume that it was done at this time, that the grand jury be duly impaneled on the first day of the term of court. From the record we gather that perhaps on the same day of the killing, if not, only a day or two later, the
United States ex rel. Davis v. Camden County Jailpublic domain
OPINION COHEN, Senior District Judge. Petitioner, Bernice E. Davis, seeks issuance of a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 et seq., attacking the legality of her confinement in the New Jersey State Prison. The grounds set forth in the petition are: first, that there has been an unlawful delay in arraignment by New Jersey authorities depriving petitioner of due
United States ex rel. Grano v. Andersonpublic domain
OPINION LAYTON, District Judge. In late March 1968, Petitioner (Grano) was arrested in Delaware on a charge of burglary. He was tried, convicted and sentenced in April 1968. On May 19, 1969, pursuant to an extradition proceeding filed by the State of Louisiana, the Governor of Delaware issued a warrant against Grano, and on June 12, 1969, the day of Grano’s release, he appeared in the Delaware Superior Co