Filed: Oct. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: _ No. 95-4215EM _ Ivan Stroh, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: September 25, 1996 Filed: October 2, 1996 _ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Having searched the record and considered the parties' briefs, we find no merit in Stroh's contentions. Stroh failed to show "new evidence" likely to produce a different result on retr
Summary: _ No. 95-4215EM _ Ivan Stroh, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: September 25, 1996 Filed: October 2, 1996 _ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Having searched the record and considered the parties' briefs, we find no merit in Stroh's contentions. Stroh failed to show "new evidence" likely to produce a different result on retri..
More
_____________ No. 95-4215EM _____________ Ivan Stroh, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _____________ Submitted: September 25, 1996 Filed: October 2, 1996 _____________ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _____________ PER CURIAM. Having searched the record and considered the parties' briefs, we find no merit in Stroh's contentions. Stroh failed to show "new evidence" likely to produce a different result on retrial, prejudice attributable to counsel's claimed deficiencies, or the prosecutor's knowing use of perjured testimony. We also conclude the district court correctly denied relief on Stroh's sentencing claim. Finally, we do not reach arguments Stroh raises for the first time on appeal. We thus affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
