Cases

PER CURIAM: John Lovell, appointed counsel for Jose Miguel Almonte in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent. review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent exam

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated February 5, 2010, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff John Baena did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defen

SELYA, Circuit Judge. When the government enters into a plea agreement with a criminal defendant, it acquires a duty to carry out the obligations it has undertaken in both letter and spirit. This duty devolves upon the government’s attorneys. But those attorneys, as officers of the court, remain bound by their corollary duty to provide full and accurate information about the offen

SUMMARY ORDER ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED. Petitioner Jose Almonte appeals from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, Judge). Almonte was charged with murder in the second degree, robbery in the first degree, and crim

STRAUB, Circuit Judge: This interlocutory appeal arises from a wrongful termination action brought by several former employees of the City of Long Beach (“City”) against the City, the City Manager, and the Republican members of the City Council (“Council members”), both in their individual capacities and in their official capacities as Council members. Plaintiffs-appellees (hereinafter, “Plaintiffs”) claim that the defendants-

Almonte v Rost (2018 NY Slip Op 06873) Almonte v Rost 2018 NY Slip Op 06873 Decided on October 17, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law §

People v Almonte (2019 NY Slip Op 03541) People v Almonte 2019 NY Slip Op 03541 Decided on May 7, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 43

OPINION WEISBERGER, Acting Chief Justice. This case comes before us on four questions of law certified by the Superior Court. The four certified questions are as follows: “1. Does the Privileged Communications Act, § 9-17-24, violate Article 5 of the Rhode Island Constitution as an unconstitutional intrusion upon the function of the Judiciary? “

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 15-2070 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. EDWIN OMAR ALMONTE-NÚÑEZ, Defendant-Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Daniel R. Domínguez, U.S. District Judge]

Botsford, J. A Superior Court jury convicted the defendant of murder in the first degree on the theories of deliberate premeditation and extreme atrocity or cruelty, and of larceny of a motor vehicle. In this direct appeal from his convictions, the defendant argues: (1) the partial denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of his apartment was error; (2) the prosecutor included improper remarks

Matter of Calderon v Almonte (2018 NY Slip Op 01053) Matter of Calderon v Almonte 2018 NY Slip Op 01053 Decided on February 14, 2018 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau

INTRODUCTION JOHN T. CURTIN, District Judge. Petitioner Luis Jose Almonte, an alien in the custody of the United States Depart*235ment of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (collectively, “DHS”), has filed this pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking release from deten

SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court and may not summarize all portions of the opinion. Jari Almonte v. Township of Union (A-73-24) (090169) Argued November 17, 2025 -- Decided June 25, 2026 JUSTICE HOFFMAN, writing for a unanimous Court. In this appeal, the Court considers

484 A.2d 900 (1984) Concetta SILVESTRO v. Angelo ALMONTE III. No. 83-207-M.P. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. November 30, 1984. *901 Dennis J. Roberts II, Atty. Gen., Marilyn F. McGair, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent. Michael V. Milito, John W. Dineen, R.I. Legal Services, Providence, for petitioner.

DECISION AND ORDER ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD, District Judge. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Cristono Almonte (“Plaintiff.’) has sued Defendant Averna Vision & Robotics, Inc. (“Defendant”) for damages for personal injuries he sustained during the course of his employment with Brunner International, Inc. (“Brunner” or “Plaintiffs employer”) while working on the “Brake Shoe Inspection and

478 F.3d 100 Maria ALMONTE, Mary Cammarato, Barbara Davis, and Peter Snow, Plaintiffs-Appellees,Richard Schuh and Gregory Scott, Plaintiffs,v.The CITY OF LONG BEACH, Mona Goodman, James P. Hennessy, Thomas Sofield, Jr., individually and as members of the Council of the City of Long Beach and Glen Spiritis, as Manager of the City of Long Beach, Defendants-Appellants,Denis G. Kelly and Leonard Remo, Defendants.Docket No. 06-2010-c

— Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.), rendered December 12, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of 10 to 20 years, unanimously affirmed. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, and giving the People the benefit of every reasonable infe

COFFIN, Chief Judge. Appellants were convicted of fraudulent possession and sale of counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes and of conspiracy. On appeal, some or all of the appellants challenge the sufficiency of the government’s affidavit supporting its application for a wiretap, alleged multiplicity in the conspiracy count, the trial court’s refusal to reread large amounts of testim

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 15-2388 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. RAFAEL TANCO-PIZARRO, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Juan M. Pérez-Giménez, U.S. District Judge] B

TORRESEN, Chief District Judge. Defendant-Appellant Axel Irizarry-Rosario challenges his 84-month sentence for possession of firearms on the grounds that the government breached its plea agreement with him. Finding no error, we affirm. I. Background On September 15, 2016, Irizarry-Rosario pleaded guilty to a two-count i