Legal Opinion

United States v. Stubblefield

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided March 20, 2013No. Criminal No. 2008-0171PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROYCE C. LAMBERTH, Chief Judge.

Before the Court is defendant Mark Stubblefield’s pro se Motion [109] to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Defendant claims he received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel and requests that the Court order an evidentiary hearing to determine whether he is entitled to relief under § 2255. Upon consideration of the Motion and supporting Memorandum [109], the Government’s Opposition [114], the defendant’s Reply [116], the entire record herein, and the applicable law, the Court will deny the Motion for…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  5. Cullen v. PinholsterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. Mark StubblefieldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016
  2. United States v. WrightDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
  3. United States v. SuggsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
  4. United States v. AbassDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2025
  5. United States v. LeakeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2020

1 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