Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES, V. ) Criminal No. 13-CR-00109 (ESH) TREVOR HOPKINS, Defendant. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Trevor Hopkins, proceeding pro se, has filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence based on his claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and sentencing error. (See Mot. Under § 2255 at 4 [ECF 167].) For the reasons stated herein, the petition will be denied. BA

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. Dr. Mark Hopkins filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his 2010 conviction and sentence for tax evasion. Before his trial, the district court ordered him to make monthly payments into the court's registry to ensure he was c

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Carl Eric Hopkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to compel the Government to file a Fed.R. Crim.P. 35(b) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before J.R. MCFARLANE, M.C. HOLIFIELD, K.J. BRUBAKER Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CLAYTON R. HOPKINS SERGEANT (E-5), U.S. MARINE CORPS NMCCA 201400351 SPECIAL

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES 0. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed July 16, 2012 (Doc. 66); (ii) the Defendants’ Motion for Leave of Court to Reply to Plaintiffs’ Reply to Hopkins’ Response to Motion for Summary Judgment, filed September 4, 2012 (Doc. 106) (“Motion for Surreply”); and (iii) the Defe

CCA 20100800. Review granted on the following issue: WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FAILS TO ALLEGE AN ARTICLE 134 TERMINAL ELEMENT, THE CHARGE FAILS TO STATE AN OFFENSE UNLESS THE TERMINAL ELEMENT CAN BE “NECESSARILY IMPLIED” FROM THE LANGUAGE OF THE SPECIFICATION. THE MISSING TERMINAL ELEMENT FROM SPECIFICATIONS 2-12 OF CHARGE IV CANNOT BE NECESSARILY IMPLIED FROM THE TEXT. ARE THE CHARGES FATALLY DEFECTIVE? N

PER CURIAM: Rufus Hopkins seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certifícate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the

ORDER Louis Hopkins, Jr., pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography and was sentenced to 210 months’ imprisonment. He appealed his sentence and we vacated on the ground that the district court failed to address his nonfrivolous primary argument in support of a below-guidelines sentence. On resentencing the district court explained at length its reasons for rejecting the previously ignored argument and reimposed the sa

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the briefs and arguments of the parties, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed. Appellant Troy Antoine Hopkins appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute one kilogram or more of phency

*535ORDER A jury found Louis Hopkins guilty of possessing a firearm after a felony conviction, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1); distributing crack, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a); and witness tampering, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), (3). The district court calculated a guidelines imprisonment range of 46 to 57 months, but imposed a sentence of 108 months. On appeal, Hopkins argues that 108 months is unreaso

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. XAVIER R. HOPKINS, Defendant. Crim. Action No. 05cr333-01 (CKK) This case comes before the Court upon the receipt of a Report and Recommendation dated June 8, 2010, from Magistrate Judge Alan Kay. No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have been received by the Court. “ct. Accordingly, it is this day of June, 2010, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED

JUDGMENT PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the briefs and arguments of the parties, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed. Appellant Troy Antoine Hopkins appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute one kilogram or more of phency

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dalton Dion Hopkins appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for sentence modification. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Hopkins, <

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dalton Dion Hopkins appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion for sentence modification. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Hopkins, <

577 F.3d 507 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. George HOPKINS, Appellant. No. 06-5091. United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit. Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) February 11, 2008. Not Precedential Opinion Filed February 13, 2008. On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States January 21, 2009. Filed: Augu

MEMORANDUM ** Barbara L. Hopkins appeals from the 18-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction for bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Hopkins contends that her sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to appropriately consider her history and characteristics and the nature

OPINION ALDISERT, Circuit Judge. This appeal by Reginald L. Hopkins requires us to decide whether the United States Distinct Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania adequately articulated its consideration of the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) when it sentenced Hopkins to 168 months of imprisonment. On appeal, Hopkins contends that the District Court failed to establish a record demonstrat

PER CURIAM: Sean Jervitt Hopkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for production of transcripts at government expense. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFF

*694ORDER AND JUDGMENT * WADE BRORBY, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted w

408 F.Supp.2d 1123 (2005) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Charles William HOPKINS, Defendants. No. 00-40024-06-SAC. United States District Court, D. Kansas. December 14, 2005. *1124 *1125 *1126 *1127 Annette B. G