⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

20 opinions for “Erica Coleman”

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2019-04-26 · Published · cited 0× · 382 F. Supp. 3d 851
PAMELA PEPPER, United States District Judge In December 2004, the defendant was indicted in a three-count indictment; one of those three counts charged him with possessing with intent to distribute cocaine base. Dkt. No. 1. About a month later, the government filed an information under 21 U.S.C. § 851, giving notice
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2015-03-20 · Published · cited 0× · 475 S.W.3d 40; 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 39; 2015 WL 1263495
OPINION TAYLOR, JUDGE: At issue in.this consolidated appeal from the Campbell and Kenton Circuit Courts is whether public libraries in Kentucky, created by petition pursuant to Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 173.710 et seq., may assess the library’s ad valorem tax rate in accordance with KRS 132.023 (commonly referred to as House Bill 44) or pursuant to the provisions of KRS 173.790.
State v. Colemanpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025-09-04 · Published · cited 1× · 343 Or. App. 229
No. 792 September 4, 2025 229 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JEFFREY WADE COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 22CR45513; A182683 Theodore E. Sims, Judge. Submitted May 15, 2025. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Crimin
State v. Colemanpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025-09-04 · Published · cited 1× · 343 Or. App. 229
No. 792 September 4, 2025 229 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JEFFREY WADE COLEMAN, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 22CR45513; A182683 Theodore E. Sims, Judge. Submitted May 15, 2025. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Crim
Coleman v. Newsompublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2025-03-19 · Published · cited 13× · 131 F.4th 948
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RALPH COLEMAN; PETER No. 24-4023 COCKCROFT; ERNESTO D.C. No. VENEGAS; JULIO GARZA, 2:90-cv-00520- KJM-DB Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. OPINION GAVIN NEWSOM; JEFF MACOMBER; JOE STEPHENSHAW;
Coleman v. Statepublic domain
Supreme Court of Florida · 1993-01-21 · Published · cited 0× · 616 So. 2d 8; 18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 80; 1993 Fla. LEXIS 72; 1993 WL 8935
OVERTON, Justice. We have for review Coleman v. State, 599 So.2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA1992), in which the district court addressed the same question we recently answered in State v. Johnson, 616 So.2d 1 (Fla.1993).1 In accordance with our decision in Johnson, we quash the decision of the district court in this case and remand this cause for resentencing. It
Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont) · 2025-01-16 · Published · cited 0×
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________ NO. 09-24-00003-CV ________________ CODY NEIL TAYLOR, Appellant V. ERICA DUCKWORTH AND LEIGH PEASTER, Appellees _____________________________________________________
People v. Colemanpublic domain
California Court of Appeal · 2021-06-17 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 6/17/21 See Concurring Opinion CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, E074251 v. (Super.Ct.No. CR59166) MICHAEL JOHN COLEMAN, OPINION Defendant and Appell
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2020-07-22 · Published · cited 7× · 967 F.3d 458
Case: 18-70011 Document: 00515499760 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/22/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 22, 2020
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2019-04-30 · Published · cited 0×
04/30/2019 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs April 2, 2019 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WESLEY DAWONE COLEMAN Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hardeman County No. 16-CR-04 J. Weber McCraw, Judge ___________________________________
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2015-08-19 · Published · cited 66× · 799 F.3d 676; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14563; 2015 WL 4934560
TINDER, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-Appellant Dunnet Bay Construction Company sued Defendants-Appellees Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) and its then-Secretary of Transportation Gary Hannig in his official capacity, alleging that IDOT’s Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program discriminates on the basis of race. The district court granted summary judgment to Defend
Coleman v. Statepublic domain
Nevada Supreme Court · 2014-04-03 · Published · cited 0× · 2014 NV 26
130 Nev., Advance Opinion 2ID IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA RAYSHAUN COLEMAN, No. 60181 Appellant, vs. FILED THE STATE OF NEVADA, APR 0 3 2014 Respondent.
District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016-03-30 · Published · cited 0× · 179 F. Supp. 3d 809; 2016 WL 1247401; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41964
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SHARON JOHNSON COLEMAN, United States District Judge Petitioner Gerald Winfield filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of his incarceration at Hill Correctional Center. Winfield maintains he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel because his counsel failed to challenge his conviction on grounds which had a reasonable probability of su
Mississippi Supreme Court · 2018-02-08 · Published · cited 2× · 268 So. 3d 470
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2016-CA-00844-SCT BENARDRICK C. McKINNEY v. KASEY HAMP DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/21/2016 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WATOSA MARSHALL SANDERS TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: STEPHANIE NICOLE MORRIS TONYA YEVETTE POWELL DALANEY LEE MECHAM COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: TUNICA COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: TONYA YEVETTE POWELL
State v. Colemanpublic domain
Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2007-11-02 · Published · cited 30× · 970 So. 2d 511; 2007 WL 3226870
970 So.2d 511 (2007) STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Glen COLEMAN. No. 2006-KA-0518. Supreme Court of Louisiana. November 2, 2007. Rehearing Denied January 7, 2008. *512 Capital Appeals Project, Jelpi Pierre Picou, Jr., Letty S. DiGiulio, for appellant. Charles C. Foti, Jr., Attorney General, Paul Carmouche,
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · 2005-10-27 · Published · cited 0×
Affirmed and Opinion filed October 27, 2005 Affirmed and Opinion filed October 27, 2005. In The
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2019-10-30 · Published · cited 0×
FIFTH DIVISION MCFADDEN, C. J., MCMILLIAN, P. J., and SENIOR APPELLATE JUDGE PHIPPS NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules October 30,
People v. Colemanpublic domain
Illinois Supreme Court · 1998-10-01 · Published · cited 1624× · 701 N.E.2d 1063; 183 Ill. 2d 366; 233 Ill. Dec. 789; 1998 Ill. LEXIS 938
701 N.E.2d 1063 (1998) 183 Ill.2d 366 233 Ill.Dec. 789 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. Dedrick COLEMAN, Appellant. No. 81441. Supreme Court of Illinois. October 1, 1998. *1066 John E. Horn, Elizabeth, Kelley, Tinley, for Dedrick Coleman. Linda D. Woloshin, A
North Carolina Industrial Commission · 2008-09-08 · Published · cited 0×
*********** The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Donovan and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence (with the exception of the Stipulation on plaintiff's average weekly wage referenced above); rehear the parties or their representatives;
Mississippi Supreme Court · 2013-03-28 · Published · cited 3× · 109 So. 3d 1050; 2013 Miss. LEXIS 76; 2013 WL 1235892
DICKINSON, Presiding Justice, for the Court: ¶ 1. The trial court denied defendant Virginia College’s motion to compel arbitration. Because the plaintiffs failed to allege sufficient facts to support a claim that they were fraudulently induced to agree to the arbitration provision, we reverse and remand. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶ 2. Virginia College1