United States v. Ardley

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the Supreme Court did not indicate this Court should ignore “our well-established rule that issues and contentions not timely raised in the briefs are deemed abandoned”
• noting that “the Supreme Court’s remand order ... is cast in the usual language,” and that there is no requirement “that we treat the case as though the Apprendi issue had been timely raised in this Court”
• stating it is a “well-established rule that issues and contentions not timely raised in the briefs are deemed abandoned”
• stating it is a “well-established rule that issues and contentions not timely raised in the briefs are deemed abandoned”
• stating after a remand from the Supreme Court that “we apply our well-established rule that issues and contentions not timely raised in the briefs [prior to Supreme Court remand] are deemed abandoned” and declining to consider any Apprendi error after remand
• “[W]e apply our well-established rule that issues and contentions not timely raised in the briefs are deemed abandoned.” (collecting cases)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).