GLORIOSO

v.

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Citator

Cited By (30 total)

• Jackson v. Louie L. Wainwright, 421 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 1982)
  …counsel challenged the admissibility of the statements on other grounds, overlooking the merits of this claim which certainly had an “arguable chance of succeeding.” We disagree. In Jennings v. United States, 391 F. 2d 512 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 868, 89 S.Ct. 154, 21 L.Ed.2d 136 (1968), it appeared that Jennings was first warned by Ft. Pierce, Florida, police of his Miranda rights. After Jennings answered a few questions he announced that he would not ankwer any further questions and the interr…
• Browder v. Dir., Dep't of Corr. of Ill., 434 U.S. 257 (U.S. 1978)
  …or, Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 73 (a), has resulted in dismissal of appeals from dispositions on habeas corpus petitions. E. g., Flint v. Howard, 464 F. 2d 1084, 1086 (CA1 1972). See also Fitzsimmons v. Yeager, 391 F. 2d 849 (CA3) (en banc), cert. denied, 393 U. S. 868 (1968); Munich v. United States, 330 F. 2d 774 (CA9 1964). We see no reason to hold to the contrary. No other statute of the United States is addressed to the timeliness of a motion to reconsider the grant or denial of habeas corpus relief, and the…
• Sonnenblick-Goldman Corp. v. Nowalk, 420 F.2d 858 (3d Cir. 1970)
  …it. It has been held that the thirty-day period for taking an appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional, United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229, 80 S.Ct. 282, 4 L.Ed. 2d 259 (1960); Fitzsimmons v. Yeager, 391 F. 2d 849, 853 (C.A.3), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 868, 89 S.Ct. 154, 21 L.Ed.2d 137 (1968); Raughley v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 230 F. 2d 387 (C.A.3, 1956).2 If defendant’s motion failed to toll the running of the time for appeal, the appeal is late. Thus, the key issue is whether the motion was timely.…