United States v. McCambry
United States v. McCambry
Opinion
Appellate Case: 23-3260 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 10/22/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT October 22, 2025 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 23-3260 (D.C. Nos. 2:19-CV-02394-JAR-JPO, ASHAWNTUS S. MCCAMBRY, 2:19-CV-02491-JAR, & 2:16-CR-20003-DDC-1) Defendant - Appellant. (D. Kan.)
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 23-3262 (D.C. Nos. 2:18-CV-02463-JAR-JPO, NICHOLAS MATTHEW HURTADO, 2:19-CV-02491-JAR, & 2:15-CR-20032-DDC-2) Defendant - Appellant. (D. Kan.)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 23-3269 (D.C. Nos. 2:18-CV-2501-JAR-JPO, DAVID SHEVLIN, 2:19-CV-02491-JAR, & 2:15-CR-20099-DDC-1) Defendant - Appellant. (D. Kan.)
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee, Appellate Case: 23-3260 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 10/22/2025 Page: 2
v. No. 23-3277 (D.C. Nos. 2:18-CV-2117-JAR-JPO, GREGORY RAPP, 2:19-CV-02491-JAR, & 2:14-CR-20067-JAR-1) Defendant - Appellant. (D. Kan.) _________________________________
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY * _________________________________
Before HOLMES, Chief Judge, MATHESON, and EID, Circuit Judges. _________________________________
These matters are before us on the Appellants’ Unopposed Motion to Summarily
Resolve Appeals, wherein they each request a certificate of appealability (COA) on the
following issue:
Did the district court err when it concluded that the Sixth Amendment is not violated if the government establishes the absence of prejudice when a prosecutor intentionally and unjustifiably intrudes on the defendant’s confidential attorney- client communications after the defendant pleads guilty but before the defendant is sentenced?
Appellants each acknowledge that, absent a COA, these appeals must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 2253
v. Orduno-Ramirez, 61 F.4th 1263 (10th Cir. 2023) and United States v. Hohn, 123 F.4th 1084
Upon consideration, the abatement of these matters is lifted. Each appeal shall
proceed on the preliminary record already on file. Appellants’ requests for a COA are
* This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 2 Appellate Case: 23-3260 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 10/22/2025 Page: 3
foreclosed by Orduno-Ramirez and Hohn. Accordingly, we deny a COA for each appeal
and dismiss these matters.
Entered for the Court
CHRISTOPHER M. WOLPERT, Clerk
3
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished