United States v. Aaron Thomas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that district court sentencing Thomas could not entertain Thomas’s claim that the “state judge [in the underlying state-court conviction] failed to inform [Thomas] of several of his constitutional rights when [Thomas] pleaded guilty”
• holding that district court sentencing Thomas could not entertain Thomas's claim that the \state judge [in the underlying state-court conviction] failed to inform [Thomas] of several of his constitutional rights when [Thomas] pleaded guilty\
• applying Custis to bar a defendant’s challenge to his federal sentence based on a constitutional defect in a prior state conviction because he alleged no Gideon violation and the applicable U.S. Sentencing Guideline lacked statutory authorization for such a challenge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).