18 U.S.C. § 3001
Procedure governed by rules; scope, purpose and effect; definition of terms; local rules; forms—(Rule)
Scope, rule 1.
Purpose and construction, rule 2.
Proceedings to which rules apply, rules 54 and 59.
Definition, rule 54(c).
Rules of District Courts and Circuit Courts of Appeal, rule 57.
Forms, rule 58.
Effective date, rule 59.
Citation of rule, rule 60.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case: Thomas v. McDonough
Thomas v. McDonough (2006)
“William Greg Thomas Procedural Background On March 24, 2003, Petitioner Thomas filed a Motion for Appointment of Counsel Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3001 et seq. and 21 U.S.C. § 848 et seq.”
In re: Carlos Brown (2019)
“Under 18 U.S.C. § 3001 , the statutes in Part II of Title 18, including § 3771, are governed by the applicable definitional rules of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.”
Griffin v. McNeil (2009)
“§ 2254 Petition and for *1351 Appointment of Counsel Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3001 et seq. and 21 U.S.C. § 848 et seq.”
United States v. Rostoff (1997)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 3001 (a)(1). The Rostoffs’ argument in opposition to the government’s motion for summary judgment — essentially a reconstituted version of the points raised in their earlier (failed) motion to dismiss — proceeds as follows: since the periods of probation have…”
In re Brown v. United States (2024)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 3001 (citing to Federal Rules of Criminal Proce- dure to define, inter alia, the scope of the codified criminal procedure statutes; purpose and construction of rules; proceedings to which the rules apply; and the courts to which they apply).”
Jose Arturo Alvarado v. State (2012)
“See 18 U.S.C.A. § 3001 (West 2001) (codifying Fed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.