Legal Opinion

United States v. McGaughy

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 29, 2012No. 11-2030PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judge.

This case requires us to consider a district court’s subject-matter jurisdiction to re-sentence a defendant under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure after 14 days have passed from sentencing. We hold the 14-day limitation is jurisdictional and precludes a district court from acting on a Rule 35 motion after 14 days have passed.

Appellant Michael McGaughy pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute marijuana, and the district court sentenced him to 46 months’ imprisonment. Months later, McGaughy filed a motion under § 2255 motion alleging…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Gonzalez v. ThalerSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
  4. Bowles v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  5. Henderson v. ShinsekiSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Barnes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
  2. Lopez-Munoz v. BarrCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019
  3. United States v. WyssCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  4. United States v. GreenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018
  5. United States v. SpauldingCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API