Legal Opinion
United States v. Gerald M. Schaflander, United States of America v. Stephen M. Wright
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 25, 1984No. 83-5918, 83-6001PublishedCited by 196 opinions
1Per curiam
Defendants-Appellants Schaflander and Wright appeal the District Court’s Order denying their motion 1 to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Notice of Appeal was timely filed, and we have jurisdiction to consider the appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
FACTS:
After a lengthy trial, the appellants were each convicted of ten counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. See United States v. Schaflander, 719 F.2d 1024, 1025 (9th Cir.1983). Thereafter, they moved for a new trial, alleging, inter alia, ineffective assistance of counsel. The District Court denied the motion 2…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Blackledge v. AllisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Marcus T. Baumann v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Patricia Campbell HearstCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by196 opinions
- Russell A. Tinsley v. Bob BorgCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Mandell Jackson, Joseph Davis, and Romano GinesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
- People v. BurgenerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Ramee Jamal Shah, Aka: Eddie Harris, Jr. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Jeffrey Dean HowardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
191 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.