Legal Opinion

Ted J. Otsuki v. United States Parole Commission

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided November 19, 1985No. 84-2543PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

This three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 10(e). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court, 598 F.Supp. 531, dismissing the appellant’s challenge to a decision by the United States Parole Commission. The issue presented is whether under the superior program achievement regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 2.60, the Parole Commission may decline to advance the parole date to the maximum extent…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Lewis L. Hatton v. T.M. Keohane, Warden, F.C.I., Terminal Island, CaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  3. Briggs v. United States Parole CommissionDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
  4. Otsuki v. United States Parole CommissionDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1984

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. FriedlandDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1995
  2. Istvan Kele v. Peter Carlson, Warden, U.S. Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API