Cases

ESTADO LIBRE ASOCIADO DE PUERTO RICO TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL II JOSÉ DOMINGO SOTO Apelación PACHECO procedente del Tribunal de Apelante Primera Instancia, KLAN202400784 Sala de Mayagüez v.

*62 OPINION AND ORDER GUSTAVO A. GELPI, District Judge. The above-captioned case arises from the damages Emmanuel Fernández Jorge (“Fernández”) and Carmen Lidia Jorge (“Lidia”) (collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) allegedly suffered as a result -of Fernández being shot by a member of the Puerto Rico Police Department (“PRPD”) following

11TH COURT OF APPEALS EASTLAND, TEXAS JUDGMENT Jorge Alvarado Soto, * From the 238th District Court of Midland County, Trial Court No. CR51505. Vs. No. 11-19-00214-CR * July 30, 2021 The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opi

Opinion filed July 30, 2021 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-19-00214-CR __________ JORGE ALVARADO SOTO, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 238th District Court Midland C

POLITZ, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Jorge Soto-Hernandez is a resident alien charged with knowingly and for gain assisting an alien, Filemon Rosas-Gallegos, to enter the United States illegally, in violation of section 241(a)(13) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(13). After a hearing, an immigration judge

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Fisch, J.), rendered on or about April 7, 2000, unanimously affirmed. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Saunders, 52 AD2d 833). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Opinion & Order SALVADOR E. CASELLAS, U.S. Senior District Judge On February 12, 2015, Plaintiffs Eduardo Soto-Cintrón and his minor son ASM sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 2679, et seq, claiming that federal agents subjected them to unlawful arrest, detention, and assault. Pending before the Court is the United States’ Motion for Summary Judgment.

MEMORANDUM ** Jorge Rivera Soto seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) upholding an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss in *528part and deny in part the petition for review. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determinatio

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered November 1, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the first and second degrees, and sentencing him, as a per-' sistent violent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 12 years to life and 8 years to life, respectively, unanimously affirmed. The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Questi

166 F.3d 348 98 CJ C.A.R. 6456 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995,

MEMORANDUM * Jorge Arturo Soto-Olarte (“SotoOlarte”) and his wife Maria Jesus Esteves-La Torre (“La Torre”), natives and citizens of Peru, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)’s opinion dismissing their appeal of an immigration judge (“IJ”)’s denial of their petitions for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. *31 Plaintiff Eduardo Soto-Cintrón and his 17-year-old son went to a post office in Coto Laurel, Puerto Rico to pick up some mail. While Soto-Cintrón waited in his red Ford F-150 truck, his son retrieved some envelopes from the post office and returned to his father's veh

555 F.3d 1089 (2009) Jorge Arturo SOTO-OLARTE; Maria Jesus Esteves-La Torre, Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 06-71822. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 9, 2008. Filed February 23, 2009. *1090 Edgardo Quintanilla, Quintanilla Law Firm, S

ORDER The court withdraws its memorandum disposition filed on June 30, 2008. Respondent’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc is therefore dismissed as moot. The parties are instructed to file simultaneous briefs addressing: (1) whether an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) can consider discrepancies between Petitioner’s testimony and other evidence in making a credibility determination, when Petitioner was on not

memorandum: ** Petitioner seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying a motion to reconsider as untimely and number-barred, and denying a motion to reopen as untimely. We review the BIA’s denial of motions to reopen or to reconsider for abuse of discretion. See Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir.2002). The regulations state that a motion to

MEMORANDUM ** Jorge Luis Soto-Galaviz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider its previous order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion. Oh v. Gonzales,

621 F.Supp.2d 1062 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Jorge Alberto SOTO-CASTELO, Defendant. Case No. 2:08-cr-00157-ECR-GWF. United States District Court, D. Nevada. October 15, 2008. *1064 U.S. Attorney by: None Appearing. Counsel for Defendant(s) None Appearing. MINUTES OF THE COURT ED

609 F.Supp.2d 207 (2009) Jorge L. HOLGUÍN SOTO, Plaintiff v. Hillary RODHAM-CLINTON, Secretary of the U.S. Department of State, Defendant. Civil No. 08-1890 (JAG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. April 14, 2009. *209 Patrick D. O'Neill-Cheyney, O'Neill & Gilmore, San Juan, PR, for Plaintiff. Rebecca Varga

MEMORANDUM** Federal prisoner Jorge Rodarte-Soto appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of his term of supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and we affirm. Rodarte-Soto contends that 18 U.S.C. § 3583, which authorizes the imposition of a term of supervised release, is unconstitutional as applied under Apprendi v. New Jersey

BOUDIN, Chief Judge. This is an appeal from the district court’s dismissal of a law suit brought on behalf of technicians working for the Property Registry of Puerto Rico. The Property Registry is attached to the Puerto Rico Department of Justice (“the Department”), and the defendants in the law suit were officials of the Department. The pertinent events can be quickly summarized.