Cases

U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________ No. 201800169 _________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. Alexander M. BRADSHAW Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appella

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-appellant Andrew Bradshaw appeals from a 30-month prison sentence imposed for violating the terms of supervised release. We assume familiarity with the facts and procedural history. We review interpretations of law de novo, factual findings for clear error, and the overall criminal sentence for procedural and substantive reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard. See,

580 F.3d 1129 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Vance G. BRADSHAW, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-3307. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. August 26, 2009. *1131 John K. Henderson, Jr., Federal Public Defender Office, Wichita, KS, for the Defendant-Appellant. David M. Lind (with Marietta Park

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-appellant Andrew Bradshaw appeals from a 30-month prison sentence imposed for violating the terms of supervised release. We assume familiarity with the facts and procedural history. We review interpretations of law de novo, factual findings for clear error, and the overall criminal sentence for procedural and substantive reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard. See,

MEMORANDUM ** Federal prisoner John Bradshaw appeals pro se the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction for conspiracy to engage in money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. Bradshaw first contends that the sentencing court erred in imposing an enhancement for a le

MEMORANDUM ** John Bradshaw appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 63-month sentence imposed for conspiracy, identity theft, production of five or more unauthorized identifications, possession of stolen mail, possession of counterfeit security of an organization, and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1028(a)(1) and (7), 1708, 513(a), and 2. Bradshaw’s attorney

*993MEMORANDUM** Defendant John Bradshaw appeals his 96-month prison sentence for conspiracy to engage in money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). Defendant argues that the district court erred by imposing a two-level enhancement to his base offense level for his “leadership role” in the conspiracy pursuant to U.S.S

SELYA, Circuit Judge. The poetess Nikki Giovanni once commented that: “Mistakes are a fact of life. It is the response to the error that counts.” Elaine Partnow, The Quotable Woman: 1800-1981 453 (1983). Defendant-appellant Joseph Bradshaw, a recidivist robber, would have done well to heed the message inherent in these words of wisdom. The tale follows.

152 F.3d 936 U.S.v.Bradshaw* NO. 97-9108 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. July 28, 1998 Appeal From: S.D.Ga. ,No.96000771CR1DHB 1 Affirmed.

85 F.3d 642 U.S.v.Bradshaw* NO. 94-2920 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit May 10, 1996 Appeal From: N.D.Fla., No. 94-03012-LAC 1 AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3728 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Christopher Lamont Bradshaw llll

859 F.2d 919 U.S.v.Bradshaw* NO. 87-1940 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. OCT 06, 1988 1 Appeal From: N.D.Tex. 2

880 F.2d 418 U.S.v.Bradshaw*** NO. 88-5289 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. JUN 22, 1989 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. 2 AFFIRMED.

782 F.2d 179 */**U.S.v.Bradshaw 85-5378 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. 1/8/86 1 S.D.Fla. AFFIRMED

ORDER AND JUDGMENT In accordance with 10th Cir.R. 9(e) and Fed.R.App.P. 34(a), this appeal came on for consideration on the briefs and record on appeal. This matter is before the court on defendant-appellant’s renewed application for bail pending appeal pursuant to Fed.R. App.P. 9(b). In the interest of justice, we partially remand the matter to the district court for reconsideration of defendant’s application for

BECKWITH, Associate Judge, concurring in the result: I concur in the result and agree with the Per Curiam opinion that the trial court on remand must make specific findings whether clear and convincing evidence exists that “no condition or combination of conditions [under D.C.Code § 23-1321(c) ] will reasonably assure ... the safety” of *399Ms. Brad

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied. Same case below, 445 Fed. Appx. 176.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied. Same case below, 433 Fed. Appx. 618.

709 F.2d 1518 U. S.v.Bradshaw 82-1546 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Ninth Circuit 5/2/83 1 D.Ariz. AFFIRMED