Legal Opinion
United States v. Stoltz
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided July 19, 2004No. CRIM. 99-3563(DSD/JMM). No. CIV. 03-5580(DSD)PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DOTY, District Judge.
This matter is before the court upon defendant’s motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and his request for leave to amend his § 2255 motion. For the following reasons, defendant’s request for leave to amend is granted and his § 2255 motion, as amended, is denied.
BACKGROUND
On November 17, 1999, defendant and four co-defendants were indicted on a charge of conspiracy to manufacture, distribute and possess with intent to distrib ute methamphetamine. 1 Defendant’s trial was joined with that of co-defendant Aaron Carver. The jury…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- People v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 2006
- People v. JohnsonColorado Court of Appeals · 2005
- Orchard v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2004
- Lilly v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2004
- Morris v. United StatesDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.