LILES

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• State v. Garofalo, 453 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
  …e superceding information [*907] did not make any substantive changes which would unreasonably prejudice the preparation of his defense. Cf. United States v. Drucker, 453 F.Supp. 741 (S.D.N.Y.1978), aff'd, 591 F. 2d 1332 (2d Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 963, 99 S.Ct. 1510, 59 L.Ed.2d 778 (1979); United States v. Kelley, 478 F.Supp. 514 (E.D.Mo.1979) (statute tolled by original indictment where su-perceding indictment added facts to cure jurisdictional deficiency and slightly changed description of buil…
• Meeks v. Cabana, 845 F.2d 1319 (5th Cir. 1988)
  …however, merely requires that there be knowledge of the right to appeal and a failure to make known the desire to exercise that right. Norris, 588 F. 2d at 135-37; see also Huff v. Wainwright, 583 F. 2d 744, 745 (5th Cir.1978), [*1323] cert. denied, 440 U.S. 963, 99 S.Ct. 1508, 59 L.Ed.2d 777 (1979); Loter v. Estelle, 546 F. 2d 151, 152-53 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 846, 98 S.Ct. 150, 54 L.Ed.2d 112 (1977). The state court’s finding of waiver therefore involves a pure question of fact that is entitl…
• United States v. Gipson, 985 F.2d 212 (5th Cir. 1993)
  …ire to appeal. See id., vol. 16, at 7; see also Meeks, 845 F. 2d at 1323 (upholding finding of waiver where defendant failed to inform his attorney of his desire to appeal); Huff v. Wainwright, 583 F. 2d 744, 745 (5th Cir.1978) (same), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 963, 99 S.Ct. 1508, 59 L.Ed.2d 777 (1979). Because the record clearly indicates that Gipson in [*217] formed his attorney of his desire to appeal, we conclude that no waiver occurred.7 Therefore, Gipson satisfied the prejudice element of Strickland. See…