Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

10th Circuit Case Commentaries

United States v. Stapp: Standards for Firearm Enhancement Under §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) and the Limits of McGirt-Based Collateral Attacks

United States v. Stapp: Standards for Firearm Enhancement Under §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) and the Limits of McGirt-Based Collateral Attacks

Date: Apr 16, 2025
United States v. Stapp: Standards for Firearm Enhancement Under §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) and the Limits of McGirt-Based Collateral Attacks Introduction United States v. Stapp, No. 24-7009 (10th Cir. Apr. 15,...
Establishing But-For Causation and Evidence-Based Future Restitution Under the TVPRA

Establishing But-For Causation and Evidence-Based Future Restitution Under the TVPRA

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Establishing But-For Causation and Evidence-Based Future Restitution Under the TVPRA 1. Introduction United States v. Coulter is a published decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the...
Direct Physical Control Suffices for Actual Possession under § 922(g)(1): No Exclusivity Requirement

Direct Physical Control Suffices for Actual Possession under § 922(g)(1): No Exclusivity Requirement

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Direct Physical Control Suffices for Actual Possession under § 922(g)(1): No Exclusivity Requirement Introduction In United States v. Thompson, 24-4006 (10th Cir. Apr. 15, 2025), the Tenth Circuit...
Limits on Explanatory Requirements for § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions: United States v. McDonald

Limits on Explanatory Requirements for § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions: United States v. McDonald

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Limits on Explanatory Requirements for § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions: United States v. McDonald Introduction United States v. McDonald, No. 24-7038 (10th Cir. Apr. 15, 2025), examines the scope of...
Barragan-Gutierrez v. United States: Limits on Retroactive Second Amendment Challenges Under §2255(f)(3)

Barragan-Gutierrez v. United States: Limits on Retroactive Second Amendment Challenges Under §2255(f)(3)

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Barragan-Gutierrez v. United States: Limits on Retroactive Second Amendment Challenges Under §2255(f)(3) Introduction In United States v. Barragan-Gutierrez, 10th Cir. No. 23-8032 (Apr. 15, 2025),...
Clarifying §2255(f)(3)’s “New Right” Exception: Bruen and Rahimi Do Not Provide Retroactive Second Amendment Relief for Felons

Clarifying §2255(f)(3)’s “New Right” Exception: Bruen and Rahimi Do Not Provide Retroactive Second Amendment Relief for Felons

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Clarifying §2255(f)(3)’s “New Right” Exception: Bruen and Rahimi Do Not Provide Retroactive Second Amendment Relief for Felons Introduction United States v. Barragan-Gutierrez (10th Cir. Apr. 15,...
Direct Physical Control as Sufficient for Actual Possession: Clarifying the Standard in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) Offenses

Direct Physical Control as Sufficient for Actual Possession: Clarifying the Standard in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) Offenses

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Direct Physical Control as Sufficient for Actual Possession: Clarifying the Standard in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) Offenses Introduction The case of United States v. Thompson reached the Tenth Circuit on...
Hearsay Standards for §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) Enhancements and Bar on Collateral Attacks Post-McGirt

Hearsay Standards for §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) Enhancements and Bar on Collateral Attacks Post-McGirt

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Hearsay Standards for §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) Enhancements and Bar on Collateral Attacks Post-McGirt Introduction United States v. Stapp is a published decision of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, handed...
Coulter v. United States: Affirmation of But-For Causation and Discretionary Restitution Framework under the TVPRA

Coulter v. United States: Affirmation of But-For Causation and Discretionary Restitution Framework under the TVPRA

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Coulter v. United States: Affirmation of But-For Causation and Discretionary Restitution Framework under the TVPRA Introduction In United States v. Coulter, No. 24-6026 (10th Cir. Apr. 15, 2025), the...
Discretion and Sufficiency of Explanation in § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions Post-Amendment 821

Discretion and Sufficiency of Explanation in § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions Post-Amendment 821

Date: Apr 16, 2025
Discretion and Sufficiency of Explanation in § 3582(c)(2) Sentence Reductions Post-Amendment 821 Introduction This commentary examines the Tenth Circuit’s decision in United States v. McDonald,...
Martinez v. Quick: AEDPA Deference to Strategic Mitigation Choices and the “Fundamental Fairness” Standard for Admitted Slurs

Martinez v. Quick: AEDPA Deference to Strategic Mitigation Choices and the “Fundamental Fairness” Standard for Admitted Slurs

Date: Apr 15, 2025
Martinez v. Quick: AEDPA Deference to Strategic Mitigation Choices and the “Fundamental Fairness” Standard for Admitted Slurs 1. Introduction This commentary examines the United States Court of...
Strategic Mitigation Decisions and Fundamental Fairness in Capital Habeas Review: Martinez v. Quick

Strategic Mitigation Decisions and Fundamental Fairness in Capital Habeas Review: Martinez v. Quick

Date: Apr 15, 2025
Strategic Mitigation Decisions and Fundamental Fairness in Capital Habeas Review: Martinez v. Quick Introduction Martinez v. Quick, 10th Cir. No. 23-6001 (Apr. 14, 2025), presents a federal habeas...
Clarifying the Nexus Requirement in Withholding of Removal: Economic Motive Versus Protected Grounds

Clarifying the Nexus Requirement in Withholding of Removal: Economic Motive Versus Protected Grounds

Date: Apr 15, 2025
Clarifying the Nexus Requirement in Withholding of Removal: Economic Motive Versus Protected Grounds Introduction Hernandez-Romero v. Garland (10th Cir. Apr. 14, 2025) addresses the evidentiary...
Hernandez-Romero v. Garland: Nexus and Evidence Standards for Withholding of Removal and CAT Relief in Gang-Related Persecution

Hernandez-Romero v. Garland: Nexus and Evidence Standards for Withholding of Removal and CAT Relief in Gang-Related Persecution

Date: Apr 15, 2025
Hernandez-Romero v. Garland: Nexus and Evidence Standards for Withholding of Removal and CAT Relief in Gang-Related Persecution Introduction In Hernandez-Romero v. Garland (10th Cir. Apr. 14, 2025),...
Scope of Due Process under Rule 60(b)(4): Notice and Opportunity to Respond

Scope of Due Process under Rule 60(b)(4): Notice and Opportunity to Respond

Date: Apr 12, 2025
Scope of Due Process under Rule 60(b)(4): Notice and Opportunity to Respond Introduction United States v. Teague, decided April 11, 2025 by the Tenth Circuit, addresses the narrow circumstances in...
United States v. Poutre: Reinforcing Burden of Proof and Discretion in Compassionate Release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)

United States v. Poutre: Reinforcing Burden of Proof and Discretion in Compassionate Release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)

Date: Apr 12, 2025
United States v. Poutre: Reinforcing Burden of Proof and Discretion in Compassionate Release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) Introduction In United States v. Poutre, No. 24-8047 (10th Cir. Apr. 11,...
Establishing the “Extraordinary and Compelling” Threshold for Compassionate Release under § 3582(c)(1)(A): United States v. Poutre

Establishing the “Extraordinary and Compelling” Threshold for Compassionate Release under § 3582(c)(1)(A): United States v. Poutre

Date: Apr 12, 2025
Establishing the “Extraordinary and Compelling” Threshold for Compassionate Release under § 3582(c)(1)(A): United States v. Poutre Introduction In United States v. Poutre, No. 24-8047 (10th Cir. Apr....
Refining Notice Requirements in Habeas Corpus Reviews: Express Invitation to Reply Not Constitutionally Required

Refining Notice Requirements in Habeas Corpus Reviews: Express Invitation to Reply Not Constitutionally Required

Date: Apr 12, 2025
Refining Notice Requirements in Habeas Corpus Reviews: Express Invitation to Reply Not Constitutionally Required Introduction This commentary examines the Court of Appeals’ decision in United States...
Judicial Discretion and Community Safety in §3582(c)(1)(A) Compassionate Release Motions: United States v. Sali

Judicial Discretion and Community Safety in §3582(c)(1)(A) Compassionate Release Motions: United States v. Sali

Date: Apr 12, 2025
Judicial Discretion and Community Safety in §3582(c)(1)(A) Compassionate Release Motions: United States v. Sali Introduction United States v. Sali, decided April 11, 2025 by the Tenth Circuit Court...
Mandatory Nature and Tolling Limits of the 30-Day Petition Deadline under INA § 1252(b)(1)

Mandatory Nature and Tolling Limits of the 30-Day Petition Deadline under INA § 1252(b)(1)

Date: Apr 12, 2025
Mandatory Nature and Tolling Limits of the 30-Day Petition Deadline under INA § 1252(b)(1) Introduction The case Nava-Capilla v. Bondi arose when Antonio Nava-Capilla, a Mexican national subject to...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert