Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal No. 19-348 (CKK) LAWRENCE GAMBLE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (August 27, 2020) Pending before the Court is Defendant Lawrence Gamble’s Motion to Dismiss for Improper Ven

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal No. 19-348 (CKK) LAWRENCE GAMBLE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (July 2, 2020) Pending before the Court is Defendant Lawrence Gamble’s Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue and to Transfer Ve

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal No. 19-348 (CKK) LAWRENCE GAMBLE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (February 6, 2020) Pending before the Court is Defendant Lawrence Gamble’s Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Motion to Rev

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal No. 19-348 (CKK) LAWRENCE GAMBLE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION (December 17, 2019) Pending before the Court is Defendant Lawrence Gamble’s Motion to Revoke Detention Order, ECF

Dismissed by unpublished PER ’ CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Justin Clifford Gamble seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying'relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006)

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John Aundo Gamble seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2013) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A cer

ORDER As part of an ongoing dispute involving a neighbor’s dog’s attack on his own dog, Antonio Gamble fired several rifle shots into his neighbor’s house. Gamble later pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court sentenced him to 54 months’ imprisonment, above the applicable guidelines range of 24 to 30 months. Gamble filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed counsel cann

572 F.3d 472 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Michael Ray GAMBLE, Appellant. No. 08-2800. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: April 17, 2009. Filed: July 13, 2009. *473 Karimbumkara Jayaraman, Memphis, TN, for appellant. Michael D. Johnson, AUSA, Little Rock, AR, for app

OPINION OF THE COURT SILER, Circuit Judge. Appellant, Wayne Gamble, appeals his conviction and sentence of 78 months, which was imposed by the district court following his trial and conviction for being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). We will affirm. *217Because we wri

SUMMARY ORDER On September 18, 2001, defendant-appellant was convicted, following a bench trial, of violating 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), possession of a detectable amount of cocaine base with intent to distribute, and 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), unlawful possession of ammunition by a career criminal. After finding that Gamble was an Armed Career Criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), the district court imposed a sentence of,

408 F.Supp.2d 144 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Willie J. GAMBLE, Defendant. No. 00-CR-6149L. United States District Court, W.D. New York. January 6, 2006. *145 Robert Napier, Esq., Napier & Napier, Rochester, NY, for Defendant. Bret Puscheck, Esq., U.S. Attorney, Rochester, NY, for Plaintiff. <

ORDER Fred Henry Gamble, Jr., represented by counsel, appeals his judgment of conviction and sentence. The parties have expressly waived oral argument, and this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). In 2002, a jury convicted Gamble of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). The court sentenced him as a career offender under the

PER CURIAM: The question in this appeal is whether appellant’s habeas petition was timely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, as amended by the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). Section 2255 bars any petition filed, on behalf of a federal prisoner more than one year after the final judgment of conviction, but

116 F.3d 491 U.S.v.Gamble* NO. 95-5460 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. May 23, 1997 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. ,No.9500207CRKMM 1 Affirmed.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT GAMBLE’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT I AND DISMISSING COUNT II O’MEARA, District Judge. This matter came before the court on Defendant Brent Gamble’s August 1, 1996 motion to dismiss Count I of the indictment. The government filed a response August 15, 1996. Oral argument was heard August 27, 1996. Defendant Gamble is charged in a three-count

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued April 24, 2023 Decided August 1, 2023 No. 22-3017 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE v. JOHNNIE GAMBLE, APPELLANT Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:20-cr-00255-1)

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2018 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 19-2514 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LATASHA GAMBLE, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

7/19/2019 9:34:03 AM Compare Results Old File: New File: 17-646.pdf 17-646_new2.pdf versus 88 pages (422 KB) 88 pages (430 KB)

980 F.2d 1447 U.S.v.Gamble*** NO. 92-6264 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Dec 09, 1992 1 Appeal From: S.D.Ala.