SRUBAR

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Puentes, 50 F.3d 1567 (11th Cir. 1995)
  …tation omitted), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1016, 106 S.Ct. 1198, 89 L.Ed.2d 312 (1986) with United States v. Levy, 905 F. 2d 326, 328 n. 1 (10th Cir.1990) (extradited individual has standing to claim a violation of the rule of specialty), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1049, 111 S.Ct. 759, 112 L.Ed.2d 778 (1991) and United States v. Thirion, 813 F. 2d 146, 151 n. 5 (8th Cir.1987) (allowing the extradited individual to bring any objections the rendering country might have raised) and United States v. Najohn, 785 F. 2d 1…
• Thompson v. United States, 111 F.3d 109 (11th Cir. 1997)
  …r must show some type of harm stemming from the sentencing court’s failure to notify him of his right to appeal. Tress v. United States, 87 F. 3d 188, 189 (7th Cir.1996); United States v. Drummond, 903 F. 2d 1171, 1174 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1049, 111 S.Ct. 759, 112 L.Ed.2d 779 (1991); see also Biro v. United States, 24 F. 3d 1140, 1142 (9th Cir.1994). The requirement of explicit notice of the right to appeal one’s sentence is “designed to insure that a convicted defendant be advised precis…
• United States v. Ferraro, 992 F.2d 10 (2d Cir. 1993)
  …91 (7th Cir.1970). Judge Heaney’s approach construing a similar notice provision in rule 32(a)(2) in United States v. Drummond makes sense. United States v. Drummond, 903 F. 2d 1171, [*12] 1176 (8th Cir.1990) (Heaney, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1049, 111 S.Ct. 759, 112 L.Ed.2d 779 (1991). He noted that rule 32(a)(2) represents a “bright-line rule requiring notice in all cases [that] was adopted to eliminate persistent litigation over whether the defendant had been fully informed of his rights b…