Robert Poghen v. United States, 833 F.2d 1013 (6th Cir. 1987). · Go Syfert
Search
Robert Poghen v. United States, 833 F.2d 1013 (6th Cir. 1987). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“at most, plaintiff has demonstrated that a difference of opinion existed between himself and the union, which is insufficient to create an issue of fact as to the union's duty of fair representation.”
38 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Brandon Akrawi v. FCA US LLC, et al. (mied, 2026-03-06)
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Brandon Akrawi v. FCA US LLC, et al.
E.D. Mich. · 2026 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
at most, plaintiff has demonstrated that a difference of opinion existed between himself and the union, which is insufficient to create an issue of fact as to the union's duty of fair representation.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Robert Poghen
v.
United States
87-3125.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Nov 13, 1987.
833 F.2d 1013
Unpublished
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case

833 F.2d 1013

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Robert POGHEN, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 87-3125.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Nov. 13, 1987.

Before ENGEL, MERRITT and ALAN E. NORRIS, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

This federal prisoner, represented by counsel, appeals the district court's judgment denying his motion to vacate his sentence filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255. Upon consideration of the record and briefs submitted by the parties, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

2

Petitioner sought to attack his convictions of three counts of firearms possession obtained upon his plea of guilty. He maintained that his plea was constitutionally defective because he received ineffective assistance of counsel and because the record lacked a factual basis for the guilty plea in violation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(f).

3

Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth in the memorandum and order of January 28, 1987. Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.