USA v. Michael Ryerson
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| MICHAEL M. RYERSON |
| 12-5090 |
| January 31, 2012 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth 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
6111466712
Per Curiam OPINION filed : The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ryerson's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. This Court AFFIRMS the judgment of the district court; decision not for publication pursuant to local rule 206. Julia Smith Gibbons and Deborah L. Cook, Circuit Judges; and Lee H. Rosenthal, U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation.
|
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. Michael Ryerson | |
|---|---|
| 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: | Kelly Ann Norris |
| 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: MICHAEL M. RYERSON | |
| Represented By: | John Edward Eldridge |
| 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.
