From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Certiorari Denied

U.S.
Jun 23, 2003
539 U.S. 951 (2003)

Opinion

JUNE 23, 2003.


No. 02-10736. ARAUJO-AVILA v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 02-10737. MADRID v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 56 Fed. Appx. 423.

No. 02-10738. RUIZ-MOTA v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 917.

No. 02-10739. SMITH v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 62 Fed. Appx. 318.

No. 02-10741. DIAZ-CLARK, AKA LNU v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 62 Fed. Appx. 319.

No. 02-10742. WHITESELL v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 314 F.3d 1251.

No. 02-10743. VILLAREAL-RODRIGUEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 322.

No. 02-10746. EMBREY v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 02-10747. CHAVEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 02-10749. CARLISLE v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 311 F.3d 866.

No. 02-10750. DINNALL v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 02-10754. MARTINEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 59 Fed. Appx. 638.

No. 02-10759. CORONA-MARTINEZ v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 67 Fed. Appx. 245.

No. 02-10764. WALLS v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

No. 02-10765. WILLIAMSON v. UNITED STATES. C.A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 55 Fed. Appx. 698.


Summaries of

Certiorari Denied

U.S.
Jun 23, 2003
539 U.S. 951 (2003)
Case details for

Certiorari Denied

Case Details

Full title:CERTIORARI DENIED

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jun 23, 2003

Citations

539 U.S. 951 (2003)
123 S. Ct. 2628

Citing Cases

Young v. U.S.

The Court has no inherent power to correct an illegal sentence, but rather must look to the specific…

Herring v. Secretary, Dept. of Corrections

As we repeatedly have admonished, "[a]rguments raised for the first time in a reply brief are not properly…