⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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 “Stewart v. United States”

Supreme Court of the United States · 2019-03-25 · Published · cited 0× · 139 S. Ct. 1390; 203 L. Ed. 2d 622
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2019-01-07 · Published · cited 0× · 139 S. Ct. 792; 202 L. Ed. 2d 570
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2018-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 139 S. Ct. 415; 202 L. Ed. 2d 320
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2018-11-05 · Published · cited 0× · 139 S. Ct. 473; 202 L. Ed. 2d 361
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2018-01-08 · Published · cited 0× · 138 S. Ct. 718; 199 L. Ed. 2d 585
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
District Court, District of Columbia · 2024-09-27 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHRISTIE STEWART, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 23-cv-1194 (TSC) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Christie Stewart—a disabled Black woman—sued her former employer, the U.S. Depa
District Court, District of Columbia · 2021-10-15 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PASSION STEWART, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 21-2573 (JEB) UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Unhappy about how her local post office is handling her packages, Plaintiff Passion Stewart brought this pro se action against the United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · 2017-01-05 · Published · cited 1× · 130 Fed. Cl. 172; 2017 U.S. Claims LEXIS 5; 2017 WL 65872
*174Pro Se Plaintiff; Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Tort Claims; Criminal Claims. ORDER HORN, J. On November 3, 2016 joro se plaintiff Ni-coll Stewart filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims against various state agencies and personnel including the “Department of Descrimination.”1<
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-05-16 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 2050; 195 L. Ed. 2d 247; 84 U.S.L.W. 3633; 2016 U.S. LEXIS 3139
Petitions for rehearing denied.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2016-05-25 · Published · cited 2× · 191 F. Supp. 3d 923; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68704; 2016 WL 3024114
DECISION AND ORDER LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge Petitioner Syrenas Stewart moves to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that he no' longer qualifies for an enhanced term under the Armed Career Criminal Act, (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). His motion turns on whether simple robbery under Wis. Stat. § 943.32 still qualifies as a “violent felony” after the Supreme Court’s decision Samuel
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-04-18 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 1687; 194 L. Ed. 2d 789; 84 U.S.L.W. 3586; 2016 U.S. LEXIS 2526
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-02-29 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 1227; 194 L. Ed. 2d 225; 84 U.S.L.W. 3478; 2016 U.S. LEXIS 1128
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-03-21 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 1481; 194 L. Ed. 2d 573
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2016-03-21 · Published · cited 0× · 136 S. Ct. 1467; 194 L. Ed. 2d 564; 84 U.S.L.W. 3524; 2016 U.S. LEXIS 2054
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2015-02-23 · Published · cited 0× · 135 S. Ct. 1468; 191 L. Ed. 2d 413; 83 U.S.L.W. 3679; 2015 U.S. LEXIS 1085
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2015-02-05 · Published · cited 0× · 89 F. Supp. 3d 993; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13762; 2015 WL 477226
ORDER J.P. STADTMUELLER, District Judge. The petitioner, Jermaine Stewart, pled guilty to one count of an indictment charging him with conspiracy to distribute one kilogram or more of heroin, resulting in death. (See, e.g., Case No. 08-CR-197, Docket # 587, # 603). On March 1, 2011, the Court sentenced Mr. Stewart to a term of imprisonment of 300 months. (Case No. 08-CR-197, Docket #832, #833)
Supreme Court of the United States · 2015-02-23 · Published · cited 0× · 135 S. Ct. 1476; 191 L. Ed. 2d 418; 83 U.S.L.W. 3679; 2015 U.S. LEXIS 1485
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2014-10-06 · Published · cited 0× · 135 S. Ct. 118; 190 L. Ed. 2d 90; 83 U.S.L.W. 3187; 2014 U.S. LEXIS 6198
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Supreme Court of the United States · 2015-02-23 · Published · cited 0× · 135 S. Ct. 1435; 191 L. Ed. 2d 392; 83 U.S.L.W. 3678; 2015 U.S. LEXIS 1415
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014-10-08 · Published · cited 0× · 584 F. App'x 150
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Reginald B. Stewart appeals the district court’s order denying his request for limited discovery and dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stat