United States v. Agramonte
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
This case is before the Court on defendant Pedro Agramonte’s motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Agramonte’s motion and memoranda allege three errors which he contends require that his conviction be vacated and the case be scheduled for a new trial. See Memorandum in Support of Petitioner’s § 2255 Motion at 4-19. Specifically, Agramonte claims that (1) the Court erred by admitting evidence of other crimes, (2) the Court improperly instructed the jury to consider that evidence, and (3) Agramonte…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Jones v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- United States v. MitchellDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- United States v. KingDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- Jones v. HoltDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- United States v. MorrowDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- United States v. BurwellDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.