Cases

KANNE, Circuit Judge. This consolidated appeal involves two criminal cases from the Southern District of Illinois. In the first case — which we call the “threat case,” numbered 15-1899 on appeal — William Mabie was convicted of sending threatening letters through the mail. In the second case — which we call the “assault case,” numbered 16-2432 on appeal — Mabie was convicted of

995 A.2d 223 (2010) Darryl MATTIS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee. No. 09-CM-831. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Submitted April 22, 2010. Decided May 20, 2010. *224 Robert H. Hollander, appointed by the court, for appellant. Jeffrey A. Taylor, United States Attorney at the time, and Channin

PER CURIAM. Defendant Eric Smith was convicted of conspiracy to possess cocaine base with the intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (Count 1), and establishing and maintaining a crack house, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)(1) (Count 2). After several appeals and remands, Smith was sentenced to consecutive sentences of 120 months on the first count and 240 months on the second. In this appeal, Smith arg

Opinion of the Court GIERKE, Judge: A general court-martial composed oí officer and enlisted members convicted appellant, contrary to his pleas, of two specifications of maltreatment of a subordinate, two specifications of assault and battery, one specification of indecent assault, and three specifications of communicating indecent language, in violation of Articles 93, 128, and 134, Uniform

THOMSEN, Chief Judge. Petitioner Board seeks an order under sec. 11(2) of the N.L.R.A., 29 U.S.C.A. § 161(2), requiring obedience to a subpoena duces tecum issued by it in a representation proceeding. On September 14, 1960, Textile Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO filed a petition for certification as bargaining *136representative of certain emplo

KEITH, Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant Rodney Skinner (“Skinner”) appeals his conviction and sentence following a guilty plea to possession and distribution of obscene matter in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466 and 2. Skinner argues § 1466 contains an unconstitutional presumption and he also argues § 1466 is unconstitutionally vague. First, because Skinner lacks standing to c

989 F.2d 508 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. UN

DECISION HODGSON, Chief Judge: The appellant was convicted of using and distributing marijuana. The government’s case rests on the testimony of Sergeant Alan Hrabe and his wife, Kathy. Sergeant Hrabe admitted to using marijuana “possibly a thousand times,” and Kathy acknowledged substantial use of marijuana, lysergic acid diethyamide (LSD), cocaine, and amphetamines. In late April 1986, Kathy Hrabe became

Opinion of the Court PER CURIAM: Contrary to his pleas, the accused was convicted by a panel of officer members of violations of Articles 125, 133, and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 925, 933 and 934, respectively. The sentence to confinement for 6 months, partial forfeitures, and dismissal from the service was approved by the convening authority. The Court of Military Revi

SNYDER, Judge, with whom HODGSON, Chief Judge, joins (concurring in part and dissenting): I concur with Parts I through III of the majority opinion. However, for the reasons set forth infra, I disassociate myself *714from Parts IY through VI, and respectfully dissent. I The

JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge. Attorney Norman Zalkind (Zalkind), of Boston, Massachusetts is appealing an Order of Reprimand based on the district court’s determination that he had violated various provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Rhode Island 1 while appearing pro

PRITCHARD, Circuit Judge. The plaintiff in error, defendant below, was indicted, tried, and convicted in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of West Virginia for an alleged violation of section 217 of the Criminal Code of the United States. That portion of the indictment which is material charges the defendant with having— “ * * * deposited and caused to be deposited, in a

CAYTON, Judge. The two appellants were convicted of knowingly presenting an obscene motion picture in a theater in the District of Columbia. D.C.Cpde 1967, §22-2001 (a) (1969 Supp.). A jail sentence of 60 days plus a fine was imposed on one appellant, and the other was ordered to pay a fine or in lieu thereof to serve 30 days in jail. The judge also ordered the film condemned. Bringing the case here for r

MULLIGAN, Circuit Judge: On a previous appeal to this court we remanded this case to the trial judge, *493 Hon. Milton Pollack, United States District Judge, Southern District of New York, for a hearing to determine whether certain wiretap evidence use

DANAHER, Circuit Judge (dissenting): Let it be observed immediately that the sitting division is unanimous in concluding that this appellant was not entitled to the procedural protections against discharge of the Veterans Preference Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. § 863 (1964), or the Lloyd-LaFollette Act as amended, 5 U.S.C. § 652. He never had Civil Service status.1 Ne

The United States Bond Mortgage Company, which will be referred to as plaintiff, brought suit against Ida M. Keahey, J.J. Hacker, and wife, to recover on two promissory notes executed by defendant Keahey, and to foreclose a real estate mortgage given to secure the same. There is no controversy as to the material facts. The notes were executed by defendant Keahey on October 15, 1908, to H.A. Kahler, who afterward transferred the same to the Penn. Mutual Life Insurance Company, which company

THAYER, Circuit Judge. At the conclusion of the trial of this case in the lower court counsel for the respective parties stipulated, in substance, that it should be decided upon the pleadings and the evidence; that no point or objection should be urged by either party to the cause as against the other based upon the insufficiency of the pleadings to present the case of the plaintiff or the defense of the defendant; that the case

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ERIC F. MELGREN, District Judge. After 21 years of seemingly irreproachable public service, Police Sergeant Michael Monroe was fired; But not just fired; by his account, fired for being in the wrong place (in the Lawrence Police Department), at the wrong time (during the 2011-2012 Kansas University ticket scandal), with the wrong people (biased decision-makers), and having the wron

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SYLVIA WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Case No. 16-1931 (RJL) ) PARK PLACE INC, et al., ) ee FILED Defendants. DEC 16 2019 MEMORANDUM OPINION Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy (December [ * , 2019) [Dkt. # 29, 31] Sylvia Williams brings various common law and federal claims arising from her allegedly unlawful arrest and prosecution after an incident at a nightclub in the District of Columbia. See Compl. 5-12 [Dkt. # 1-2

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00746-CV ALAMO HEIGHTS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant v. Catherine CLARK, Appellee