United States v. Charles Donald Lema

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is not newly discovered for the purposes of Rule 33 when based on facts known to the defendant at the time of trial
• holding that a claim of ineffective assistance of <br> counsel is not newly discovered for the purposes of Rule 33 <br> when based on facts known to the defendant at the time of <br> trial
• stating that Rule 33, which provides seven days in which a motion for new trial may be filed, unless based on newly discovered evidence, is jurisdictional
• stating ____ that Rule 33, which provides seven days in which a motion for new trial may be filed, unless based on newly discovered evidence, is jurisdictional
• “[R]ule [33] is jurisdictional, and the district court is without discretion to grant a motion for new trial that is not timely filed.”
• \We hold merely that the defendant has not properly raised these issues in a timely motion for new trial and that the district court was therefore without jurisdiction to grant a new trial on that basis\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).