Where a petitioner from Mexico sought review of an order denying his motion to remand in which he argued that the immigration judge lacked statutory authority to enter an order of removal in absentia, the motion was untimely and the ...

Tagged with: Removal timeliness

Where the government brought an action to reduce tax assessments to judgment and enforce liens, and appellants challenged the district court’s entry of an order of sale, the notice of appeal was untimely as to certain orders, and the challenge ...

Tagged with: mootness Notice Of Appeal timeliness

Petitioner, a citizen of The Gambia, petitioned for review of the denial of her motion to reconsider, reopen and terminate her removal proceedings Where petitioner’s motion was untimely and numerically barred and foreclosed by legal precedent, the Board of Immigration ...

Tagged with: Reconsideration Removal Proceedings timeliness

Where a defendant moved to correct his sentence based on a decision that declared the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act unconstitutional, the motion was untimely, so the judgment is affirmed. Judgment is affirmed. Warren v. U.S. (MLW ...

Tagged with: Motion to Correct Sentence timeliness

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, the pro se motion was untimely, so the judgment is vacated and remanded with directions to dismiss the motion. Vacated. Gatling v. State (MLW ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Relief Pro Se Motion timeliness

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, the pro se motion was untimely, so the judgment is vacated and remanded with instructions to dismiss. Vacated. Wenzel v. State (MLW No. 74016/Case ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Motion timeliness

Where a defendant challenged his sentence based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States with the filing of a pro se letter seeking Section 2255 relief, the petition was untimely, and the judgment is affirmed because ...

Tagged with: Habeas Relief timeliness

Where a defendant challenged the denial of post-conviction relief, the motion was due within 180 days of the defendant’s delivery to serve his sentence, so the pro se motion was untimely and is remanded for dismissal. Remanded. Marks v. State ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Relief timeliness

Where an employer argued that the trial court erred in dismissing its petition, which argued that the Missouri Commission on Human Rights lacked jurisdiction to issue a right-to-sue letter because the plaintiff employee’s administrative complaint was untimely, under recent case ...

Tagged with: MHRA Amendments Right-To-Sue Letter timeliness

Where a defendant challenged the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion, arguing that his failure to timely file was the result of third-party interference by his counsel on direct appeal when counsel inaccurately informed him of the deadline, the failure ...

Tagged with: Post-Conviction Relief Third-Party Interference timeliness

Where five state employee defendants argued that they were officially immune from negligence claims brought against them, claims were abandoned against two of the employees before the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants, so summary judgment ...

Tagged with: jurisdiction Notice Of Appeal timeliness