USA v. Charles Bramlett
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| CHARLES WAYNE BRAMLETT |
| 11-10434 |
| April 29, 2011 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
511823798
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-10434 Affirmed ] Judge: EHJ , Judge: EGJ , Judge: JES Mandate pull date is 05/08/2012 for Appellant Charles Wayne Bramlett; denying motion to dismiss appeal filed by Appellee USA [6932366-2]; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [6932366-3]; denying motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [6932366-4] [11-10434]
|
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: USA v. Charles Bramlett | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff - appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | John Preston Bradford |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant - appellant: CHARLES WAYNE BRAMLETT | |
| Represented By: | Peter Michael Fleury |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
