HOGAN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Brian N. (a juvenile male), 900 F.2d 218 (10th Cir. 1990)
  …at the “proceedings” begin with the filing of an information. See United States v. Doe, 631 F. 2d 110, 112-13 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 867, 101 S.Ct. 202, 66 L.Ed.2d 86 (1980); In re Martin, 788 F. 2d 696, 697-98 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1009, 106 S.Ct. 3306, 92 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986). Further proceedings under the act include the transfer for criminal prosecution,4 the adjudication hearing,5 and the [*222] The government argues that the statute’s language is unclear because deleting one o…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Walt Anthony Sturmoski, 971 F.2d 452 (10th Cir. 1992)
  …urmoski’s testimony simply cannot be attributed to the nondisclosure in the witness list. Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting her testimony. See United States v. Carter, 756 F. 2d 310, 312 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1009, 106 S.Ct. 3307, 92 L.Ed.2d 721 (1986); United States v. Greene, 497 F. 2d 1068, 1083 (7th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 909, 95 S.Ct. 829, 42 L.Ed.2d 839 (1975). Sturmoski also asserts that Jackie Sturmoski’s testimony concerning her detection…
• United States v. Carlton J. Smith, 851 F.2d 706 (4th Cir. 1988)
  …) and the proceedings under the Act had been dismissed. The crucial date for determining whether the Juvenile Delinquency Act applies is the date on which the Government institutes proceedings. In re Martin, 788 F. 2d 696 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 478 U.S. 1009, 106 S.Ct. 3306, 92 L.Ed.2d 719 (1986). Martin was indicted for conspiracy to import marijuana. The indictment charged that the conspiracy existed from an unknown date until about June 1984 and that Martin’s participation in the conspiracy was confi…