HARRIS

v.

UNITED STATES; ELZY V. UNITED STATES; AND DAVENPORT V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Smith v. Texas, 543 U.S. 37 (U.S. 2004)
  …as Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed petitioner’s sentence, reasoning that the nullification instruction provided an adequate vehicle through which the jury could consider petitioner’s evidence. We denied certiorari on May 15, 1995. Smith v. Texas, 514 U.S. 1112. Petitioner filed an original writ of habeas corpus in the trial court in 1998. That suit was dismissed as untimely, but the Texas Legislature amended its criminal code in such a way as to allow petitioner to file a timely writ. Petitioner did so,…
• United States v. Cooper, 133 F.3d 1394 (11th Cir. 1998)
  …d 285, 305 (Tex.Cr.App.1994) (holding that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of rental car because the rental company signed a warrant for the defendant’s arrest nearly two months after the rental contract expired), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1112, 115 S.Ct. 1967, 131 L.Ed.2d 857 (1995). . See also Kelly, 414 F.Supp. at 1146 ("The fact that the rental agency may have had a legal right to repossess the automobile does not strip defendant of Fourth Amendment protection.”). See generally Blume…
• United States v. Ocie Mills, 221 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2000)
  …S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Mills, 817 F.Supp. 1546 (N.D.Fla.1993). That decision, too, was affirmed on appeal. See Mills, 36 F. 3d 1052, 1057 (11th Cir.1994). The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari. See Mills v. United States, 514 U.S. 1112, 115 S.Ct. 1966, 131 L.Ed.2d 856 (1995). As of November 21, 1991, the Millses had completed their terms of imprisonment and supervised release. On April 11, 1996, the Millses filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The basis for the petit…