Loading…
Opinion
125 S. Ct. 97 · Supreme Court of the United States · Oct 4, 2004
Full text
Beltran-Rodriguez v. United States. Mendez-Martinez v. United States. Vasquez-Cid v. United States. And Villasenor-Perez v. United States
Opinions in this case
Parentheticals
“[Rjecalling the mandate more than six years after its issuance ‘just to apply the benefit of hindsight,’ would constitute an abuse of discretion.” (quoting Gray-Bey v. United States, 209 F.3d 986, 988 (7th Cir.2000) (per curiam))
Craig Anthony Carrington v. United States of America, Robert Charles Tillitz v. United States
“[RJecalling the mandate more than six years after its issuance ‘just to apply the benefit of hindsight,’ would constitute an abuse of discretion.” (quoting Gray-Bey v. United States, 209 F.3d 986, 988 (7th Cir.2000) (per curiam))
"[R]ecalling the mandate more than six years after its issuance `just to apply the benefit of hindsight,' would constitute an abuse of discretion." ( quoting Gray-Bey v. United States, 209 F.3d 986, 988 (7th Cir.2000) (per curiam))
Craig Anthony Carrington v. United States of America, Robert Charles Tillitz v. United States
