⚖ 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 “United States v. Russell Alford”

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2024-01-05 · Published · cited 11× · 89 F.4th 943
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued September 18, 2023 Decided January 5, 2024 No. 23-3023 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE v. RUSSELL DEAN ALFORD, APPELLANT Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:21-cr-00263
United States Court of Military Appeals · 1992-03-11 · Published · cited 12× · 34 M.J. 150; 1992 CMA LEXIS 58; 1992 WL 43826
Opinion of the Court EVERETT, Senior Judge: On December 18, 1989, Private Stephen D. Alford was tried at Fort Carson, Colorado, by a military judge sitting as a general court-martial. Contrary to his pleas, he was found guilty of two specifications of assault and battery and one specification each of communicating a threat and disorderly conduct, in violation of Articles 128 and 134 of the Unif
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023-10-23 · Published · cited 5× · 84 F.4th 672
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0232p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Ap
Court of Appeals of Mississippi · 2023-01-24 · Published · cited 0×
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2022-KA-00025-COA DCORIOUS ALFORD A/K/A DCORIOUS KEON APPELLANT ALFORD A/K/A DECORIUS KEON ALFORD v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/05/2021 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. TOMIKA HARRIS IRVING COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: COPIA
Alford v. Hernandezpublic domain
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2017-10-24 · Published · cited 5× · 807 S.E.2d 84; 343 Ga. App. 332
Reese, Judge. *332In this mandamus action, C. Dean Alford and other members of the University System of Georgia's Board of Regents (collectively, "Appellants") seek review of a superior court's grant of summary judgment to Rigoberto Rivera Hernandez and other undocumented immigrants (collectively "Appellees"). Each of the Appellees are Georgia
People v. Russellpublic domain
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023-05-24 · Published · cited 4× · 216 A.D.3d 1111; 189 N.Y.S.3d 704; 2023 NY Slip Op 02797
People v Russell (2023 NY Slip Op 02797) People v Russell 2023 NY Slip Op 02797 Decided on May 24, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
Alford v. Thibaultpublic domain
Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2013-06-27 · Published · cited 10× · 83 Mass. App. Ct. 822; 990 N.E.2d 93; 2013 WL 3199267; 2013 Mass. App. LEXIS 110
Katzmann, J. In this case arising from the sale of a condominium unit, the plaintiff, Mark Alford, appeals from a judgment entered following a jury-waived trial before a judge of the Superior Court, dismissing his claims against the defendants, *823Wayne Thibault, the seller, and Nathaniel Coughlin and Elena Russo, the buyers, for breach of fiduciary duty and conspiracy t
Kentucky Supreme Court · 2011-05-19 · Published · cited 34× · 338 S.W.3d 240; 2011 Ky. LEXIS 84; 2011 WL 2086687
OPINION OF THE COURT William Alford appeals from his convictions of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse, for which he received a total sentence of life imprisonment. He appeals to this Court as a matter of right.1 *243The extensive use of inadmissible hearsay requires we reverse and remand for a new trial. This case
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2012-12-12 · Published · cited 0× · 908 F. Supp. 2d 164; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175594; 2012 WL 6185726
MEMORANDUM OPINION JAMES E. BOASBERG, District Judge. Pro se Plaintiff Leroy Alford worked as a management analyst for Defendant Defense Intelligence Agency. After being terminated from his position and subsequently reinstated, he alleges that the Agency repeatedly retaliated against him. He then filed this suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-3(a), and other f
District Court, District of Columbia · 2012-12-12 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEROY ALFORD, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 10-631 (JEB) DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Pro se Plaintiff Leroy Alford worked as a management analyst for Defendant Defense Intelligence Agency. After being terminated from his position and
District Court, S.D. Texas · 2004-03-11 · Published · cited 5× · 309 F. Supp. 2d 908; 174 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2794; 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4958; 2004 WL 609301
309 F.Supp.2d 908 (2004) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Byron Alfred BOYD, Jr., Defendant. No. CRIM. H-03-362-01. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. March 11, 2004. *909 David Gerger, David Gerger et al., Houston, TX, Charles Leonard Little, Leander, TX, Robert J. Sussman, Hinton, Sussman et al.,
Russell v. Statepublic domain
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2015-02-25 · Published · cited 2× · 221 Md. App. 518; 109 A.3d 1249; 2015 Md. App. LEXIS 23
*521 BERGER, J. This case involves an appeal of two orders of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County modifying the conditions of appellant Oliver Allen Russell’s probation. On October 10, 2007, Russell was convicted of child abuse, sexual abuse of a minor, se
State v. Russellpublic domain
Nebraska Supreme Court · 2015-06-05 · Published · cited 42× · 291 Neb. 33
- 33 - Nebraska A dvance Sheets 291 Nebraska R eports STATE v. RUSSELL Cite as 291 Neb. 33 State of Nebraska, appellee, v. Cory L. Russell, appellant. ___ N.W.2d ___ Filed June 5, 2015. No. S-14-927. 1. Statutes: Appeal and Error. Statutory interpre
District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2014-04-01 · Published · cited 23× · 13 F. Supp. 3d 581; 2014 WL 1329887; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44621
ORDER AND REASONS SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge. Defendants Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Chevron Pipe Line Company, and Gulf Oil Corporation (collectively “Chevron”) move for a more definite statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e) and also move to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims against them.1 Defendant Exxon Mobil Corporation also moves for a more definite statem
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2025-08-29 · Published · cited 0×
Case: 24-40109 Document: 223-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/29/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-40109 FILED Aug
District Court, District of Columbia · 2025-01-30 · Published · cited 0×
Appendix A Department of Justice Chart Documenting Sentences in Capitol Breach Cases Monday, January 6, 2025 SENTENCES IMPOSED IN CASES ARISING OUT OF THE EVENTS OF JANUARY 6, 2021 Disclaimer: Those relying on information contained in this document should verify all information for accuracy Table 1: Cases in which the government recommended a probation sentence without home detention 1 0F Defendant Ca
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · 2019-02-26 · Published · cited 0×
Opinion issued February 26, 2019 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00112-CV ——————————— BOBBY HALL-BEY, Appellant V. DEREK WALLACE AND JEFFREY ALFORD, Appellee
District Court, District of Columbia · 2022-08-31 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Criminal Action No. 21-140 (JDB) LARRY BROCK, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant Larry Brock is charged via indictment with six offenses related to the breach of the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. See generally Superseding Indictm
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022-06-02 · Published · cited 0×
Case: 21-1131 Document: 120 Page: 1 Filed: 06/02/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ VIRGINIA MILTON AND ARNOLD MILTON, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED PERSONS, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants TRAVELERS EXCESS AND SURPLUS LINES COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STAT
District Court, District of Columbia · 2022-09-12 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal Action No. 21-421 (JDB) JOHN MARON NASSIF, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Defendant John Nassif is charged by information with four offenses related to his alleged participation in the riot at the U.S. Cap