Legal Opinion

United States v. Lewis Nathaniel Dixon

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 2, 1993No. 92-1111PublishedCited by 73 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EBEL, Circuit Judge.

Defendant Lewis Nathaniel Dixon filed a pro se motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, claiming that the district court erred at trial when it denied his motion to suppress evidence allegedly obtained from an unlawful search and seizure, and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel on appeal because counsel failed to raise the suppression issue. The district court denied the motion. We affirm.

On December 5, 1989, federal Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) agents arrested the defendant at his home. The defendant was indicted and charged with conspiracy to…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982

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

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. Carpenter v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2004
  2. United States v. Lewis Aaron CookCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  3. Florida v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Anthony Rozelle Banks v. Dan M. Reynolds, Warden, Oklahoma State Penitentiary, McAlester Oklahoma Susan B. Loving, Attorney General of OklahomaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  5. Anthony Owens v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004

68 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