Legal Opinion

Linares v. Senkowski

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided May 26, 1992No. Nos. 1320, 1321, Docket 91-2605, 92-2001PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FEINBERG, Circuit Judge:

Appellants, two of six individuals charged in connection with the criminal sale and possession of a controlled substance, appeal from orders of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Louis J. Freeh, J., dated November 4, 1991, denying their petitions for writs of habeas corpus. Appellants claim that their convictions violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the prosecutor fraudulently represented himself as an admitted *1296attorney when he was in fact never admitted to the bar. For the reasons given below, we…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Napue v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  5. Caldwell v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Green v. ArtuzDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
  2. Hughes v. PhillipsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  3. Nathan Sams v. Hans Walker, Superintendent, Auburn Correctional FacilityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
  4. Ex Parte LandCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1998
  5. Linares v. SenkowskiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992

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

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

Powered by the Exa API