Hicks-Bey v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
649 A.2d 569 (1994)
Rural HICKS-BEY, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES, Appellee.
No. 91-CF-644.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Argued November 17, 1992.
Decided November 7, 1994.
Stephen O. Russell, Oxon Hill, MD, for appellant.
Ann K.H. Simon, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty. at the time the brief was filed, and John R. Fisher, Roy W. McLeese, III, and Julieanne Himelstein, Asst. U.S. Attys., were on the briefs, for appellee.[*]
Before FERREN,[**] TERRY, and SULLIVAN, Associate Judges.
Opinion for the court PER CURIAM.
Opinion by Associate Judge SULLIVAN, concurring in part and…
Also in this document: Per curiam; Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Maryland v. CraigSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Kentucky v. StincerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Coy v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.