Search

6 results for “Michael Pacheco, Warden”

Case Title Lower Court Docketed Status Tags Question Presented
21-7414 Gregory M. Hawes v. Michael Pacheco, Warden, et al. Tenth Circuit 2022-03-18 Denied burden-of-proof criminal-procedure due-process mandatory-minimum sentencing statutory-maximum Whether Patterson v. New York has been abrogated by Apprendi and Alleyne
21A362 Gregory M. Hawes v. Michael Pacheco, Warden, et al. Tenth Circuit 2022-01-25 Presumed Complete None
20-8323 Clint Raymond Webb v. Michael Pacheco, Warden, et al. Tenth Circuit 2021-06-15 Denied due-process fourteenth-amendment liberty-interest speedy-trial state-created statutory-interpretation Whether a state-created liberty interest in a speedy trial is prohibited from being applied to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
20-7639 Joseph A. Harris v. Michael Pacheco, Warden Tenth Circuit 2021-04-01 Denied constitutional-violation corrections department-of-corrections due-process inmate-rights judicial-authority judicial-review sentencing sentencing-authority separation-of-powers Is the Department of Corrections above the Judicial Branch in such a way that it may increase a judicially given Maximum sentence without judicial ord…
19-5880 Andrew Joseph Larson v. Michael Pacheco, Warden Wyoming 2019-09-10 Denied civil-procedure conflict-of-interest constitutional-rights constructive-denial-of-counsel criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus jurisdiction name-change personal-jurisdiction presumption-of-guilt presumption-of-innocence standing state-department subject-matter trial-jurisdiction What are the necessary components for the trial court to be complete and hold jurisdiction over a case and was Avitabile's trial court complete?
18-8690 Dagoberto Ontiveros v. Michael Pacheco, Warden, et al. Tenth Circuit 2019-04-08 Denied anders-appeal anders-v-california appellate-review constitutional-law criminal-procedure defendant-rights direct-appeal due-process legal-ethics legal-frivolity right-to-counsel Whether a finding of frivolity is required when rejecting a criminal defendant's direct appeal under Anders v. California