Cases

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-4179 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. BRADY LEON BECK, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Jud

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 07-1842 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the

PER CURIAM. Joe Louis Brady appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Brady contends for the first time on appeal that his sentence violated the Supreme Court’s decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 4

BOUDIN, Circuit Judge. Because this appeal involves sentencing issues following a guilty plea, we take the background facts from the presentence report that followed Robert Brady’s conviction for criminal contempt. See United States v. Gill, 99 F.3d 484, 485 (1st Cir.1996). According to the presentence report, Brady and two close Mends traveled in late July 199

USCA1 Opinion United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 98-1561 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. ROBERT HUGH BRADY, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED ST

820 F.Supp. 1346 (1993) UNITED STATES of America, v. John K. BRADY. No. 92-CR-265J. United States District Court, D. Utah, C.D. April 7, 1993. *1347 Stanley H. Olson, Asst. U.S. Atty., U.S. Attorney's Office, Salt Lake City, UT, for plaintiff. Rodney G. Snow, Anneli R. Smith, Clyde, Pratt & Snow, Salt Lake City, UT, fo

734 F.Supp. 923 (1990) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Joseph T. BRADY, Charlotte Irene Brady, Defendants. Nos. CR-89-412-JLQ, CR-89-413-JLQ. United States District Court, E.D. Washington. March 20, 1990. *924 Ronald W. Skibbie, Asst. U.S. Atty., Spokane, Wash., for plaintiff. Charles A. Baechler, Vance W. Peterson

888 F.2d 1389 U.S.v.Brady* NO. 88-4763 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. OCT 11, 1989 1 Appeal From: N.D.Miss. 2

710 F.Supp. 290 (1989) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Ora A. BRADY, Defendant. Crim. A. No. 88-CR-321. United States District Court, D. Colorado. April 6, 1989. *291 Joseph Mackey, Asst. U.S. Atty., Denver, for plaintiff. Sheldon Emeson, Denver, for defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER M

844 F.2d 795 U.S.v.Brady NO. 87-5578 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. APR 07, 1988 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. 2 AFFIRMED.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SIMPSON, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on motion of the defendants, Edgar R. Porter and James Wilbur Brady, to declare 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) unconstitutional. The Court believes that the citation is in error. The defendants are charged with trafficking in marijuana. Both the defendants and the United States refer to a quantity in excess of fifty (50) kilogram

G. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, Chief Judge The plaintiff, Officer Kristin Brady, brings this action against her employer, United States Capitol Police (“USCP” or “defendant”), pursuant to Section 207(a) of the Congressional Accountability Act (“CAA”), 2 U.S.C. § 1317(a), asserting a single claim for unlawful retaliation. Compl. ¶¶ 35-36. By her own adm

887 F.2d 263 U.S.v.Brady (Celeste J.) NO. 89-5213 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. SEP 12, 1989 1 Appeal From: M.D.Pa. 2 AFFIRMED.

688 F.2d 825 U. S.v.Brady 81-1736 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Third Circuit 7/28/82 1 E.D.Pa. AFFIRMED

697 F.2d 298 U. S.v.Brady 81-1469 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Second Circuit 8/11/82 1 D.Vt. AFFIRMED

OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge Plaintiff Luther Brady Tansil filed suit in this court seeking $57,600 in military back pay and separation pay, $10,000,000 in money damages, and to have his 1994 bad conduct discharge from the United States Navy (“Navy”) amended to a more favorable discharge. Plaintiff alleges that the Board for Correction of

Judgment PER CURIAM. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

Judgment PER CURIAM. This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ON MOTION ORDER James A. Brady, having submitted the required appendix. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The court’s June 16, 2009 dismissal and the mandate be, and the same hereby *45are vacated and recalled, and the notice of appeal is reinstated. (2) The appendix is accepted fo