Cases

OPINION OF THE COURT NYGAARD, Circuit Judge. Jose Juan Chavez-Alvarez appeals the District Court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He contends that the Government is violating his right to due process by detaining him, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), 1 without a bond hearing

ZAMORA, Judge. {1} Defendant appeals his convictions for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor (DWI), pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 66-8-102 (2016), and for following too closely, pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 66-7-318 (1978). Defendant raises a single issue on appeal-that Section 66-7-318 is unconstitutionally

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Juan Barajas Chavez and his wife, Norma Barajas, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and w

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Juan Barajas Chavez and his wife, Norma Barajas, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003), and w

MEMORANDUM ** Juan Jose Chavez Chavez and Gloria Peña Perez, married natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reconsider the BIA’s prior order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252.

OPINION VANZI, Judge. {1} As a matter of first impression, we must decide when the three-year time limitation contained in the Medical Malpractice Act (MMA),NMSA 1978, §§ 41-5-1 to -29 (1976, as amended through 2008), begins to run in a case where a health care provider is alleged to have negligently prescribed medication to a patient. See §41-5-13. Defendant Dr. Delgad

Opinion by Judge CARPARELLLI. Plaintiff Pinnacol Assurance (Pinnacol) appeals the trial court's order denying its motions for forfeiture or apportionment of proceeds from the settlement of noneconomic damages claims between plaintiff Jose Chavez (Chavez) and defendant Kelley Trucking, Inc. (Kelley). Pinnacol asserts that the Workers' Compensation Act requires Chavez to forfeit settlement proceeds for nonecono

MEMORANDUM *** The facts of this case and the procedural history are known to the parties. Petition*761er seeks an order from this Court declaring him a national of the United States, arguing that he was unconstitutionally denied naturalization in 1960 when the former INS denied a petition filed on his behalf because his adoptive mother was not a Un

MEMORANDUM *** The facts of this case and the procedural history are known to the parties. Petition*761er seeks an order from this Court declaring him a national of the United States, arguing that he was unconstitutionally denied naturalization in 1960 when the former INS denied a petition filed on his behalf because his adoptive mother was not a Un

536 F.Supp.2d 962 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Jose CHAVEZ-RIVAS, Defendant. No. 08-CR-31. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. February 27, 2008. *963 Brian J. Resler, United States Department of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. DECISION AND ORDER</

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Luis Chavez-Quintana and Gloria Maria Garcia, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. Petitioners’ contention that the IJ violated the

MEMORANDUM ** Jose and Maria Chavez (the “Chavezes”) appeal the district court’s order dismissing their claims against sixteen border patrol agents and supervisors, a former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and the United States. The Chavezes allege intentional tort and negligence claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) and Bivens actions1

MEMORANDUM *** *548Jose Reyes Chavez-Regalado petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision which (through a lengthy chain of earlier decisions) resulted in a denial of Chavez-Regalado’s request to reopen his deportation proceedings. The BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s holding that Chavez-Reg

ORDER ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES WADE BRORBY, Circuit Judge. Appellant Jose Salvador Chavez was found guilty by a jury of one count of distribution of fifty grams or more of a mixture or substance containing methamphetamine, one count of distributing a mixture of cocaine, one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, and one count of possession with intent to d

REYNALDO G. GARZA, Circuit Judge: FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On July 29, 1998, at approximately 8:00 in the morning, Border Patrol Agents Ron Torralba, an agent with six years experience, and Neil Heideman, an agent with three and a half years experience, stopped a van traveling on Highway 286 because they suspected that it contained illegal aliens.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * BRORBY, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is ther

Case Number: 08-04-00364-CV 07/25/2006 Case stored in record room 07/25/2006 Notice sent to Court of Appeals 05/19/2006 Petition for Review disposed proceeding denied 04/18/2006 Case forwarded to Court 03/16/2006 Supplemental appendix 03/15/2006 Phone call from Clerk's Office 03/15/2006 Appendix Filed 03/15/2006 Petition for Review filed OPINION Appellant E.V. appeals from the trial court's decision to transfer him to the Institutional Divisi

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. PD-0759-21 JOSE JUAN CHAVEZ, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS ON STATE'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS CHAMBERS COUNTY NEWELL, J., filed a concurring opinion. I join the Court’s opinion. It accurately sets out

Sack, Circuit Judge: This appeal presents two state-law questions that neither this Court nor New York's courts have addressed: (1) whether New York law recognizes "cross-jurisdictional class action tolling," i.e., tolling of a New York statute of limitations by the pendency of a class action in another jurisdiction; and (2) whether a non-merits dismissal of class certification can term