United States v. Teague
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HARTZ, Circuit Judge.
A jury convicted Anthony Teague of transmitting in interstate commerce a communication to James Locatelli containing a threat. See 18 U.S.C. § 875(c). On appeal Mr. Teague claims that the district court erred by (1) requiring as a special condition of supervised release that he have no contact with the court except through counsel and (2) instructing- the jury incorrectly on the elements of the offense. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm the judgment of the district court.
I. Background
A. The Divorce
Mr. Teague hired attorney James…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Wheat v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Peretz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by82 opinions
- Richison v. Ernest Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
- Tesone v. Empire Marketing StrategiesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019
- United States v. BarrettCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
- Creative Consumer Concepts, Inc. v. KreislerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. McGeheeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
77 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.