Legal Opinion

United States v. Winkelman

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 26, 2014No. 03-4500, 03-4753PublishedCited by 112 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION SUR MOTIONS TO RECALL MANDATE

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

Presently before the Court are motions by pro se Appellants George A. Winkelman and John F. Winkelman, Jr., to recall our mandate and to reinstate their direct appeals so they can try to seek relief under the Supreme Court’s recent holding in Alleyne v. United States, — U.S.-, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013). We asked the Government to file a response to these motions, which it has done.

The brothers Winkelman have a long and protracted litigation history in this Circuit, which we need not relate in detail. It suffices to say…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  5. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by112 opinions

  1. Commonwealth, Aplt v. Dimatteo, P.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  2. United States v. Thomas ReyesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
  3. In re MazzioCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2014
  4. Nicole Walker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
  5. Butterworth v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015

107 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