Legal Opinion
United States v. Archambault
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided October 18, 2001No. CR 00-30089PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
KORNMANN, District Judge.
[¶ 1] Defendant filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 26) which motion is based on claims of double jeopardy, claimed violations of constitutional rights of due process and equal protection, and a claimed bill of attainder. The parties initially briefed the issues. U.S. Magistrate Judge Moreno conducted a hearing at which certain facts were stipulated and defendant was permitted to supplement the record (H.Tr.8-10, Doc. 30). The magistrate filed and served a report and recommendation (Doc. 35), recommending that the motion be denied.
[¶ 2] I conducted a de novo review…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Nixon v. Administrator of General ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. CummingsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- United States v. Billy Jo Lara, Also Known as Billy Joe LaraCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2002
- Morris Ex Rel. Morris v. TannerDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2003
- United States v. ArchambaultDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2002
- United States v. MedearisDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.