Cases

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Douglas A. Pannell, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) 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)

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 Wayne Wilson Pannell appeals the sentence he received for twice threatening to kidnap and murder an Assis

SUMMARY ORDER Derrek Pannell appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Ger-shon, J.), entered on May 8, 2008, convicting him, after a jury trial, of conspiracy to rob a United States Post Office, the armed robbery of a United States Post Office, and brandishing a firearm, a semi-automatic handgun, in furtherance of that robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 2114(a), and 924(c)

SUMMARY ORDER Derrek Pannell appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Ger-shon, J.), entered on May 8, 2008, convicting him, after a jury trial, of conspiracy to rob a United States Post Office, the armed robbery of a United States Post Office, and brandishing a firearm, a semi-automatic handgun, in furtherance of that robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 2114(a), and 924(c)

510 F.Supp.2d 185 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, v. Derrek PANNELL, Defendant. No. 06 CR 0578(NG). United States District Court, E.D. New York. September 20, 2007. *186 John Joseph Durham, United States Attorney's Office, Brooklyn, NY, for United States of America. Allen Lashley, Brooklyn, NY, Eric Michael Schlosser, Ber

MEMORANDUM ** 1. At oral argument, the United States agreed that Count II of Pannell’s conviction, for possessing marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), is a potentially lesser included offense of Count III, for employing a juvenile to possess marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 861(a)(1). Accordingly, we vacate Count II of the conviction.

21-2849 Pannell v. United States In the United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT AUGUST TERM 2022 No. 21-2849 DERREK PANNELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-App

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) RONALD PANNELL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:20-cv-518 (CKK/GMH) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

FERREN, Senior Judge: Following a bench trial on May 12, 2015, appellant, Vincent Pannell, was found guilty of possession of phencyclidine (PCP), in violation of D.C.Code § 48-904.01(d) (2012 Repl.), a misdemeanor. On the same day, the trial court sentenced appellant to forty-five days of imprisonment, execution of sentence suspended, and supervised probation for nine months. Appell

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

985 A.2d 462 (2009) PANNELL v. U.S. No. 08-CM-956. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. December 30, 2009. Decision Without Published Opinion Affirmed.

NEBEKER, Associate Judge, with whom Associate Judge HARRIS concurs (Statement as to reasons for voting to grant the motion for rehearing en bane): Because application of the exclusionary rule generally operates to exclude the most probative evidence of guilt, if not to make prosecution impossible, the courts should, in my view, exhaust all reasonable theories in support of admitting the evidence. I do not view t

383 A.2d 1078 (1978) UNITED STATES, Appellant, v. Major A. PANNELL, Jr. and Robert W. Dean, Appellees. No. 12135. District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Argued November 8, 1977. Decided March 9, 1978. *1079 Robert I. Richter, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Earl J. Silbert, U. S. Atty., and John A

541 U.S. 954 PANNELLv.UNITED STATES. No. 03-8904. Supreme Court of United States. March 22, 2004. 1 C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 77 Fed. Appx. 188.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

535 U.S. 1042 PANNELLv.UNITED STATES. No. 01-9315. Supreme Court of the United States. April 29, 2002. 1 C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 28 Fed. Appx. 696.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.