Legal Opinion
United States v. Clark
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 21, 1996No. 96-6004PublishedCited by 62 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
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); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. This case therefore is ordered submitted without oral argument.
Tyrone Maurice Clark appeals pro se from the Order of the district court denying his motion pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e) for the return of property. Clark claims that the method of service employed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“the FBI”) in the administrative forfeiture proceeding was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division v. CraftSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Mennonite Board of Missions v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. James Leroy MartinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- Dusenbery v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Rutter & Wilbanks Corp. v. Shell Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. HardmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. One Toshiba Color Television Two Answering MacHines One Health Tech Computer Reginald McGlory in No. 98-3578 (Pursuant to Rule 12(a), f.r.a.p.) (d.c. Civ. No. 90-Cv-00138) United States of America v. Assorted Jewelry Reginald McGlory in No. 98-3579 (Pursuant to Rule 12(a), f.r.a.p.) (d.c. Civ. No. 90-Cv-00370)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Reginald McGloryCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.