United States v. Stanford
District Court, S.D. Texas
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DAVID HITTNER, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is United States of America’s Motion for Revocation of Release Order. Having considered the motion, evidence, testimony and oral argument presented during a hearing held on June 29, 2009, and the applicable law, the Court determines the motion should be granted. Accordingly, the Court now enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law. Any finding of fact that should be construed as a conclusion of law is hereby adopted as such. Any conclusion of law that should be construed as a finding of fact is hereby adopted as…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. Carmen A. TortoraCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Albert Samuel Fortna, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
- United States v. Mauricio Rueben and Gerardo GuerraCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- United States v. William Bruce HareCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. CisnerosCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. StanfordDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2011
- United States v. StanfordDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2010