United States v. Luis Anthony Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s request for a continuance was not diligent when made five days before trial after retaining counsel for six weeks
• concluding that the appearance of a second attorney does not excuse the original attorney’s tardiness in requesting a continuance
• holding that because “there was no showing that the failure to grant a continuance resulted in defendant’s trial counsel being inadequately prepared” the defendant was not materially prejudiced
• noting that defense counsel’s representation of defendant for a “considerable time” was an important consideration in whether a continuance was warranted
• holding cumulative error analysis evaluates only effect of matters actually determined to be error and “cumulative effect of non-errors” is irrelevant
• rejecting claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on inadequate preparation and failure to make motions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Luis Anthony Rivera

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Luis Anthony Rivera
  Tenth Circuit· 1988-01-20· cited 36×
• United States v. Luis Anthony Rivera
  Tenth Circuit· 1989-05-19· cited 17×
• United States v. Luis Anthony Rivera
  Tenth Circuit· 1988-06-01· cited 6×