Legal Opinion
United States v. Noah Robinson
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided May 7, 2001No. 98-2038PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Per curiam
Noah Robinson is an incessant repetitive filer of frivolous motions attacking his conviction and sentence. In the original appeal, though he was represented by counsel, he filed five motions for leave to file a supplemental pro se brief, and we remarked, in the course of upholding his conviction, the tardy and repetitive character of these motions. United States v. Boyd, 208 F.3d 638, 641 (7th Cir.2000). He filed four other meritless pro se motions, two before and two after our judgment was issued. After our judgment was vacated by the Supreme Court and the case remanded to us for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Anthony Alexander v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- In Re Lowell H. Becraft, Jr. United States of America v. Kenneth W. NelsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Jeff Boyd, Charles Green, Sammy Knox, Noah R. Robinson, and Melvin MaysCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2000
- United States v. Alan D. CooperCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Proctor v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
- Henderson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005
- Pleas v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
- Gaffney v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
- Fillmore v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.