Legal Opinion
In Re Antrobus
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided April 22, 2009No. 09-4024PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Claiming newly discovered evidence, Sue and Ken Antrobus, the parents of Vanessa Quinn, petition us for a writ of mandamus. They seek to compel the district court to reopen and revisit its previous denial of Ms. Quinn’s status as a victim, under the terms of Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, of Mackenzie Glade Hunter’s crime of transferring a handgun to a juvenile in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(x)(l). Primarily, they seek an evidentiary hearing to present “new evidence.” Alternatively, they ask us simply to declare Ms. Quinn such a victim. For the reasons that follow,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- White v. MurthaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1967
- Parts and Electric Motors, Inc., an Illinois Corporation v. Sterling Electric, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Heriberto Fernandez MonsisvaisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- United States v. George T. KattarCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- United States v. AppersonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- D'Jamoos, Estate of Weingeroff v. Pilatus AircraftCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Bishop v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
- WILLIAM REAVES v. SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017
- United States v. WittigCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. GanadonegroDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.