green
Positive treatment
3.5 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Angelo Ramos
That Circuit concluded that "the sands of [§ 3583(i)’s] hourglass ... should remain suspended during the defendant’s incarceration on state charges,” United States v. Garrett, 253 F.3d 443, 449-50 (9th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 977 , 122 S.Ct. 1451 , 152 L.Ed.2d 393 (2002), because the "reasonably necessary” time-period should only begin to run once the defendant is in federal custody, id. at 450.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gomez-Aguilar
See Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78, 89 , 97 S.Ct. 274 , 50 L.Ed.2d 236 (1976) (holding that there is no due process violation in delaying execution of a parole warrant when defendant is serving a state sentence); see also United States v. Garrett, 253 F.3d 443, 447-48 (9th Cir.2001) (discussing Moody in revocation of supervised release context), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 977 , 122 S.Ct. 1451 , 152 L.Ed.2d 393 (2002).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Madrigal-Trujillo
v.
United States
v.
United States
01-8608.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 1, 2002.
Published
MADRIGAL-TRUJILLO
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 01-8608.
Supreme Court of the United States.
April 1, 2002.
1
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 265 F. 3d 276.