United States v. Dennis Lee Hardwell, United States of Am. v. Dennis L. Hardwell Marcel A. Hardwell, Frederick D. Bowens Adam Stallings, AKA Gene Walker, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Dennis Lee Hardwell, United States of Am. v. Dennis L. Hardwell Marcel A. Hardwell, Frederick D. Bowens Adam Stallings, AKA Gene Walker, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
50 citation events (16 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Martinez (ca10, 1999-06-10)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 38 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Martinez
10th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
As such, we construe the brief liberally, see United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996), and determine that the filing of the brief by defendant’s counsel, supplemented by the defendant’s pro se statement, meets the rules related to filing briefs in this court, see Fed.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kessler v. Brown & Williamson
10th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
See Riddle v. Mondragon , 83 F.3d 1197, 1202 (10th Cir. 1996); United States v. Hardwell , 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Thierry v. Ward
10th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
While we construe Petitioner’s appellate filings liberally, see United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996), his pro se status “does not excuse [his] obligation . . . to comply with the fundamental requirements of” 28 U.S.C. § 2253 to appeal the denial of a habeas corpus petition.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Clark v. Scott
10th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Nevertheless, because we construe petitioner’s pro se brief liberally, see United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996), we address the issues Mr. Clark raises.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Chester Lee Clark, Petitinoer-Appellant v. H.N. Scott Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma
10th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Nevertheless, because we construe petitioner's pro se brief liberally, see United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir.1996), we address the issues Mr. Clark raises.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Hardwell, Marcel
10th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
See Hardwell, 80 F.3d at 1484 (Marcel); United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 898 (10th Cir. 1996) (Dennis). -3- Following a resentencing hearing on remand, the district court determined that under the sentencing guidelines the four and one-half kilos of cocaine seized in two uncharged incidents should be considered relevant conduct for purposes of determining Marcel’s relative base offense level.
cited Cited "see" United States v. Aguilar
10th Cir. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1498 , rev'd on reh’g in part, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996) (defining "fronting” as "supplying drugs on consignment or on credit”).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Hamilton
10th Cir. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally United States v. Hardwell, 80 *1211 F.3d 1471, 1498 (10th Cir.) (“ ‘Fronting,’ or supplying drugs on consignment or on credit, is a known practice among drug dealers.”), reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. LaHue
10th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (holding issue waived when party failed “to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion”), reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Robert C. Lahue, United States of America v. Dan Anderson, United States of America v. Ronald H. Lahue, the American Hospital Association Federation of American Health Systems Association of American Medical Colleges American Osteopathic Association Missouri Hospital Association National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Amici Curiae
10th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (holding issue waived when party failed "to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion"), reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. LaHue
10th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (holding issue waived when party failed "to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion"), reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited "see" Advantage Properties v. Commerce Bank, N.A.
10th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell , 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (issue is waived when party fails “to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion”), reh’g granted in part on other grounds , 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" Ellsworth Motor v. North American
10th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Gunwall
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.), rev'd in part on other grounds on reh'g in part, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996). 10 We review for abuse of discretion Mr. Gunwall's underlying claim that the district court should have granted his motion to dismiss the indictment.
discussed Cited "see" Roberts v. Roadway Express, Inc.
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.1996) ("[Defendant] has waived this issue by failing to make' any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion.”), modified on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996).
cited Cited "see" Roger D. Rowe v. Conoco, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Du Pont Company
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 1570 , 140 L.Ed.2d 803 (1998).
cited Cited "see" Rowe v. Conoco Inc.
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell , 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh’g granted in part on other grounds , 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996), cert. denied , 118 S. Ct. 1570 (1998).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Walker
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir. 1996) (“[Defendant] has waived this issue by failing to make any argument or cite any authority to support [such a challenge].”), modified on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996). -5- AFFIRMED.
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Shawn D. Walker
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.1996) ("[Defendant] has waived this issue by failing to make any argument or cite any authority to support [such a challenge]."), modified on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996)
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Pauliasi T. Vainuku, Also Known as Paul Toni
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.) (issue waived when party fails "to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion"), reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996) 2 We use the 1995 edition of the sentencing guidelines, as did the district court 3 We also note that the disparity in the sentences here is explicable by the facts in the record.
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Vainuku
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.) (issue waived when party fails “to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion”), reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996). -2- same harm shall be grouped together into a single Group.” 2 Defendant contends that all six of his bank robbery convictions should have been combined into one group because they all involved financial institutions and the aggregate amount stolen was more than $10,000 but less than $50,000.
cited Cited "see" Bondiett v. Novell, Inc.
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" Bondiett v. Novell, Inc.
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996).
cited Cited "see" Nana v. Greene
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell , 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" Musa Rene Nana v. Joseph R. Greene, District Director, United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, Denver, Colorado, Musa Rene Nana v. Aristide, Warden, Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility D.O.C. Inmate Account Head Maxwell, Chairman, Case Managers, Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir.1996).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Hardwell, Dennis
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 898 (10th Cir.1996)
cited Cited "see" Taylor v. Hargett
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" Craig L. Taylor v. Steve Hargett
10th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996). 17 APPEAL DISMISSED.
cited Cited "see" Smith v. Hargett
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" Danny E. Smith v. Steve Hargett
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 88 F.3d 897, 897 (10th Cir.1996). 3 On appeal, petitioner raises three issues.
cited Cited "see" United States v. Hill
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1497 (10th Cir. 1996), reh’g on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996); United States v. McKneely, 69 F.3d 1067, 1078 (10th Cir. 1995).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Danny Ray Hill
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1497 (10th Cir.1996), reh'g on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996); United States v. McKneely, 69 F.3d 1067, 1078 (10th Cir.1995). 9 The district court's findings concerning the sixty-nine grams of methamphetamine found at the Rock Creek Road residence are not clearly erroneous.
discussed Cited "see" Mohammed Elboukili v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996). 9 Since petitioner's asylum hearing in April of 1996, petitioner has had ample opportunity to present his documentary evidence to the agency (whether on appeal or in a motion to reopen).
cited Cited "see" Elboukili v. INS
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 , reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir. 1996).
cited Cited "see" National Council for Improved Health v. Shalala
10th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (10th Cir.), reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996). 2 .
discussed Cited "see" Wommack v. SW Medical Center
10th Cir. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1492 (issue is waived when party fails "to make any argument or cite any authority to support his assertion"), reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996). 17 For her final argument, Ms. Wommack asserts that the district court erred in not admitting an exhibit she proffered, specifically page 1415 of Exhibit 67-g.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Greer (2×)
Colo. Ct. App. · 2011 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1487 (10th Cir.1996), reh'g granted and rev'd, 88 F.3d 897 (10th Cir.1996); People v. Zapata, 779 P.2d 1307, 1308-09 (Colo.1989).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Carrasco-Salazar
10th Cir. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
Given this distinction, we have held that “a party that has forfeited a right by failing to make a proper objection may obtain relief for plain error; but a party that has waived a right is not entitled to appellate relief.” United States v. Teague, 443 F.3d 1310, 1314 (10th Cir.2006), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 127 S.Ct. 247 , 166 L.Ed.2d 194 (2006); see also United States v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1487 (10th Cir.1996) (“Errors that are waived rather than merely forfeited through failure to object are not subject to plain error review.”), reh’g granted in part on other grounds, 88…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Dennis Lee Hardwell, United States of America v. Dennis L. Hardwell Marcel A. Hardwell, Frederick D. Bowens Adam Stallings, AKA Gene Walker
94-3376.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Jul 10, 1996.
88 F.3d 897
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

88 F.3d 897

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Dennis Lee HARDWELL, Defendant-Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Dennis L. HARDWELL; Marcel A. Hardwell, Frederick D.
Bowens; Adam Stallings, aka Gene Walker,
Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 94-3376, 94-3378, 94-3390.

United States Court of Appeals,
Tenth Circuit.

July 10, 1996.

Before EBEL, LOGAN and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.

ORDER ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

BRISCOE, Circuit Judge.

1

Dennis Hardwell has filed a Petition for Rehearing and Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc, raising the following issues: (1) Prior crimes evidence was improperly admitted against him because the United States failed to show the specific purpose for admitting the evidence, as required by Fed.R.Evid. 404(b); (2) his money laundering conviction should be reversed for the same reasons that we reversed the money laundering conviction of Marcel Hardwell; and (3) there were nine errors identified by the panel and their cumulative effect cannot be excused as harmless error. We conclude only his argument regarding his money laundering conviction has merit. Hardwell's petition for rehearing is denied in part and granted in part; his request for rehearing en banc is denied.

2

Hardwell did not argue in either his opening appellate brief or in his reply brief that financial information obtained to qualify for appointment of counsel was erroneously offered and admitted against him to establish the money laundering charge. However, under the "related cases" section of his opening brief, Hardwell states: "Appellant request[s] adoption of Co-Appellants['] claims and arguments as to the extent they are applicable to his cause pursuant to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 28(J)(ii)." In his petition for rehearing, Hardwell points our attention to this statement. While this statement clearly does not pertain to other pending appeals, the statement is nonetheless made and made within a pro se brief, which we will read liberally. See United States v. Edwards, 69 F.3d 419, 427 (10th Cir.1995), cert. denied --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 2497, 135 L.Ed.2d 189 (1996).

3

The United States was directed to respond to the petition for rehearing and to specifically address whether Dennis Hardwell's money laundering conviction should be reversed for the same reasons that supported reversal of Marcel Hardwell's money laundering conviction. In its response, the United States states that, just as in the case of Marcel Hardwell, the financial affidavit and statements made by Dennis Hardwell to establish his indigency at his initial appearance were admitted at trial without objection. The United States concedes that if we address the issue, the rationale for reversing Marcel Hardwell's money laundering conviction is also applicable to Dennis Hardwell's money laundering conviction.

4

As with Marcel Hardwell, the admission of Dennis Hardwell's financial affidavit and other statements made to establish eligibility for appointed counsel violated his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination and had a prejudicial impact on the jury's deliberations on the money laundering charge.

5

Dennis Hardwell's money laundering conviction is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED to the district court with directions to vacate his sentence for that conviction. The remainder of his convictions are affirmed and the matter remanded as previously set forth in our opinion filed April 5, 1996.