United States v. Barajas-Diaz
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
KANE, Senior District Judge.
Defendant-appellant Emiliano Barajas-Diaz (“Barajas”) appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, correct or set aside his sentence. 1 Barajas raises two claims in his appeal, one based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and the other on Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 119 S.Ct. 1707, 143 L.Ed.2d 985 (1999). We previously granted Barajas a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on his Richardson claim. 2 We now affirm the order of the district court.
Barajas was named…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Richardson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Warren Wesley Summerlin v. Terry L. Stewart, Director of Arizona Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Michael L. MontalvoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. CerviniCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- United States v. DagoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
- United States v. BeckstromCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.