Legal Opinion
Abuhouran v. Grondolsky
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided July 20, 2009No. Civ. 08-4379 (DRD), 08-4838 (DRD)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge.
In these two cases Petitioners seek relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, asserting that they are actually innocent of the money laundering charges of which they were convicted, and that they are entitled to vacatur of those convictions in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Santos, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 2020, 170 L.Ed.2d 912 (2008). The Petitioners are Hitham Abuhouran (Steve Houran) and Aktham Abuhouran (Tony Houran). Associated with them in their criminal transactions was their brother Adham Abuhouran (Adam Houran), who is now a…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Schmuck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- In Re Ocsulis DorsainvilCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- United States v. SantosSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- United States v. Gul Khan KhattakCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Hitham Abuhouran A/K/A Steve HouranCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. RashidDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Singleton v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2015