United States v. Hite

D.C. Circuit

United States v. Hite

540 F. App'x 2

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedOctober 24, 2013

DocketNo. 13-3072

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 540 F. App'x 2 (United States v. Hite) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Hite, 540 F. App'x 2 (D.C. Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the motion for release pending appeal filed by appellant, the memorandum of law and fact filed by appellee, and the reply. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed July 30, 2013, be affirmed. Appellant has not “clearly shown that there are exceptional reasons why [his] detention would not be appropriate.” 18 U.S.C. § 3145(c). We express no opinion whether appellant has satisfied the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The [3]*3Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the motion for release pending appeal filed by appellant, the memorandum of law and fact filed by appellee, and the reply. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed July 30, 2013, be affirmed. Appellant has not “clearly shown that there are exceptional reasons why [his] detention would not be appropriate.” 18 U.S.C. § 3145(c). We express no opinion whether appellant has satisfied the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The [3]*3Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

540 F. App'x 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-hite-cadc-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack