Legal Opinion
Vanwinkle v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided May 11, 2011No. 09-3462PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KEITH, Circuit Judge.
Petitioner-Appellant Arthur Vanwinkle pled guilty to use of an access device and possession of device-making equipment in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a). In return, the government dismissed the other, more serious offenses for which he was indicted. Vanwinkle subsequently filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence, arguing that his guilty plea was legally insufficient. Because Vanwinkle’s claim is procedurally defaulted and he fails to demonstrate his factual innocence from the more serious offenses with which he was charged, we AFFIRM the district…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. W. R. Walters, United States of America v. Two Hundred Sixty-Two FirearmsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- United States v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Gray v. NetherlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- United States v. GeorgeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2012
- Gibbs v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. McGaughyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
- United States v. StreetCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
- United States v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.