William Alexander May v. Ron Champion Robert H. Henry, Attorney Gen., State of Oklahoma, 961 F.2d 220 (10th Cir. 1992). · Go Syfert
Search
William Alexander May v. Ron Champion Robert H. Henry, Attorney Gen., State of Oklahoma, 961 F.2d 220 (10th Cir. 1992). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“completing and returning the enrollment form, even deducting the first premium from lott's last paycheck, can not and did not excuse the condition precedent of being actively at work....”
57 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 14 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Arocho v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (ksd, 2000-02-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Arocho v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
D. Kan. · 2000 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
completing and returning the enrollment form, even deducting the first premium from lott's last paycheck, can not and did not excuse the condition precedent of being actively at work....
cited Cited "see" Slattery v. HCA Wesley Rehabilitation Hospital, Inc.
D. Kan. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Riley v. Town of Basin, 961 F.2d 220 (10th Cir.1992); Wirtz v. Bledsoe, 365 F.2d 277, 278 (10th Cir.1966).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fay v. Chester
10th Cir. · 2011 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Hutchings v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 201 F.3d 1006, 1008 (8th Cir.2000) (affirming § 2241 denial where the petitioner claimed "that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to revoke his parole”); Campos v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 120 F.3d 49, 49 (5th Cir. 1997) (affirming § 2241 denial where the petitioner "contend[ed] that ... the Commission’s jurisdiction over him ended”); Martin v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 108 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1997) (affirming § 2241 denial where the petitioner "asserted that the Commission d[id] not have jurisdiction over him”); see also Roberts v. U.S. Dep't of the…
cited Cited "see, e.g." Artis v. U.S. Department of Justice
D.N.J. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Roberts v. United States Dept. of the Navy, 961 F.2d 220 , 1992 WL 75205 (10th Cir.1992) (unpublished opinion).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Heckert v. Dotson (In Re Heckert)
S.D.W. Va · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
N.D.Okla.1998) (citing Valencia v. Lucero, 213 B.R. 594, 595 (D.Colo.1997)); see also Samuel v. Edd, 961 F.2d 220 , 1992 WL 86698, at *2 (10th Cir.1992) (finding jurisdiction to exist for the entry of money judgment by bankruptcy court even where creditor’s claim had already been liquidated in state court). 3 .
William Alexander May
v.
Ron Champion Robert H. Henry, Attorney General, State of Oklahoma
90-6102.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Apr 23, 1992.
961 F.2d 220
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 71%
Citer courts: D. Kansas (1)

961 F.2d 220

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

William Alexander MAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Ron CHAMPION; Robert H. Henry, Attorney General, State of
Oklahoma, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6102.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

April 23, 1992.

Before LOGAN, BARRETT and EBEL, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT[*]

LOGAN, Circuit Judge.

1

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

2

Petitioner William A. May brought an action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for a writ of habeas corpus seeking relief from his state court conviction that had resulted from his plea of guilty. We grant the petitioner's request for a certificate of probable cause.

3

In the district court petitioner raised nine grounds for relief, which the court consolidated into six. On appeal petitioner raises only two contentions: that his constitutional rights were violated (1) when he was not advised of his right to appeal at the time of the hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, and (2) when he was denied assistance of counsel at that same hearing. The district court found that petitioner had been advised in writing at the time he entered his guilty plea of his right to appeal, and that there is no constitutional right to counsel in connection with a post-conviction motion to withdraw a guilty plea. The district court analyzed these grounds correctly, and we affirm for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court's memorandum opinion of February 6, 1990.

4

AFFIRMED.

5

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir.R. 36.3