Legal Opinion
United States v. Rose
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided August 3, 1999No. 98-7108PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The court therefore honors the parties’ requests and orders the case submitted without oral argument.
This appeal arises from a consolidated action in the district court to revoke, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) and (g), Dan T. Rose’s concurrent terms of supervised release. After a hearing on the matter, the district court concluded that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. Linda LockardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Jesus Arturo GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. James Harold UnderwoodCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- United States v. Johnny Frank WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Javier Cervantes-ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- United States v. Melgar-CabreraCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018
- United States of America v. Modesto GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Martinez-BarraganCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. HurlichCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Contreras-MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.