Legal Opinion

United States v. Smith

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 30, 2000No. Civ.A. 99-1688PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

LEE, District Judge.

Background

Before the Court is defendant Ronald Edward Smith’s pro se (i) Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Document No. 199 at Criminal No. 94-222) (hereafter, “section 2255 motion to vacate”). After careful consideration of the section 2255 motion to vacate, with memorandum of law in support, the government’s response and memorandum in opposition thereto, and defendant’s reply to the government’s response, the Court will grant petitioner’s motion in part and deny it in part. 1

This case…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. United States v. William Day, A/K/A William McNeilCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. HernandezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
  2. Cabiness v. Bureau Of PrisonsDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2025
  3. Dunston v. SpauldingDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
  4. Hester v. LaneDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
  5. LOZANO v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API