Legal Opinion
United States v. Robert Lutz
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 5, 1996No. 95-17040UnpublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
103 F.3d 142
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Robert LUTZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 95-17040.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 2, 1996.*
Decided Dec. 05, 1996.
Before: SNEED, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
1
MEMORANDUM**
2
Robert Lutz, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Anthony Lee Chaney v. Samuel Lewis, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections and Lloyd E. Bramlett, Superintendent, Arizona State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Javier Hincapie Sanchez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Brent Eugene Smith, United States of America v. Roberto Osegueya Martinez, United States of America v. Richard Leroy Popp, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Hamilton Copper & Steel Corporation, Plaintiff/counter-Defendant/appellant v. Primary Steel, Inc., Defendant/counter-Claimant/appelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Crowe v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- Crowe v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1998