Cases

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 13-14-00017-CV Carlos Macias v. Julian Gomez, et al. On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 8 of Hidalgo County, Texas Trial Cause No. CL-09-2420-H J

NUMBER 13-14-00017-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG CARLOS MACIAS, Appellant, v. JULIAN GOMEZ ET.AL., Appellees. On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 8 of Hidalgo Count

FILE COPY M A N D A T E TO THE 332ND DISTRICT COURT of HIDALGO COUNTY, GREETINGS: Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 11th day of December, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between Carlos Macias, Appellant, v. Jul

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 13-14-00139-CV Carlos Macias v. Julian Gomez III, M.D. and the Julian C. Gomez and Kerri S. Gomez Children's Trust On Appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas Trial Cause No. C-182-09-F

NUMBER 13-14-00139-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG CARLOS MACIAS, Appellant, v. JULIAN GOMEZ III, M.D. AND THE JULIAN C. GOMEZ AND KERRI S. GOMEZ CHILDREN’S TRUST, Appellees. On appeal from the 332

PER CURIAM. These appeals stem from a dispute between defendant-appellant Furniture Services, Inc. (FSI) and plaintiff-appellee Joseph Macias, formerly FBI’s exclusive sales representative in Puerto Rico. When FSI terminated the arrangement, Macias invoked diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), and sued FSI (along with several r

TANG, Circuit Judge: I Appellant Ruvalcaba-Villalobos was convicted of conspiracy to distribute cocaine and distribution of cocaine. On appeal he contends: (1) there was insufficient evidence of conspiracy and his connection to it to justify the admission of certain statements under the coconspirator exception to the federal hearsay rules; (2) his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses was violated b

643 F.3d 384 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julian OLGUIN, Jr.; Robert Losoya, also known as Minnesota; Juan Antonio Ledesma; Hector Daniel Macias, Defendants-Appellants. No. 09-10916. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. June 7, 2011. *387 Chad E. Meacham (argued), Cara Foos Pierce, Asst. U.S.

504 F.Supp. 864 (1980) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Rudolph Marques TORRES, Ernesto Lopez Salsedo, Richard Steven Montes, Jose Luis Buenrostro, Defendants. No. Crim. S-79-123. United States District Court, E. D. California. November 19, 1980. *865 Herman Sillas, U. S. Atty. by Julian Macias, Asst. U. S. Atty., Sacramen

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS THE STATE TEXAS, § No. 08-24-00322-CR Appellant, § Appeal from the v. § 327th District Court KEVIN ROBLES, § of

PER CURIAM: The United States of America appeals an order of the United States District Court *1379 for the Eastern District of California, Edward Dean Price, Judge, dismissing with prejudice one count charging violation of 18 U.S.C., App. § 1202(a)(1), one count charging violation of 18 U.S.C. §

PER CURIAM: The United States of America appeals an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Edward Dean Price, Judge, dismissing with prejudice one count charging violation of 18 U.S.C., App. § 1202(a)(1), one count charging violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), and one count charging violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(h)(1) contained in an in

512 F.Supp. 1299 (1981) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Daniel A. DeGUSTA, Defendant. No. S-80-285 MLS. United States District Court, E. D. California. May 4, 1981. *1300 William B. Shubb, U. S. Atty., Julian G. Macias, Asst. U. S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff. Dennis Owen Higgins, Sacramento, Cal., for d

HUG, Circuit Judge: Richard Piache (“Piache”) and James At-tarian (“Attarian”) separately appeal their convictions for numerous counts of mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (1988), sale of an unregistered security, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77e, 77x (1988), and aiding and abetting such acts, 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1988). Piache and At-tarian contend the district court failed to exclude a juror for cause

FARRIS, Circuit Judge: Campbell appeals his conviction of armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). Campbell contends that (1) his attorney’s actions during the trial, particularly his informing the court in the presence of the jury that Campbell was testifying against counsel’s advice denied him effective assistance of counsel and a fair trial, and (2) the

TRASK, Judge. This case presents the same legal problem that was considered by a different panel of this court in the case of Waggoner v. C & D Pipeline Co., 601 F.2d 456 (9th Cir. 1979). In Waggoner the question on appeal was “whether the agreement requires contributions for all hours worked by employees who perform any covered work or only for the hours actually worked in covered employment.” Wagg

16 B.R. 95 (1981) In re O.S. WILLIAMS, Jr., and Donnal Joanne Williams, Bankrupts. Bankruptcy Nos. 77-579-P, 77-580-P. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California. December 15, 1981. Charles S. Painter, Law Offices of Thomas W. Martin, Sacramento, Cal., for bankrupts. Julian G. Macias, Asst. U.S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., for U.S. Internal Revenue Service.

PER CURIAM: Defendants were convicted of violations of 18 U.S.C. § 471 (manufacture of counterfeit federal reserve notes). Defendant Salsedo was also convicted of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472 (possession and concealment of counterfeit federal reserve notes). On ap*1013peal, defendants challenge the rulings of the district court on a number of suppression motions.

GRANT, Senior District Judge: This ease requires an examination of the evidence preservation and disclosure requirements mandated by the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500. In January 1979 counterfeit hundred dollar bills were passed in Stockton, California. The defendant, John Leon Spencer, became a key suspect i

KENNEDY, Circuit Judge: Dwight Armstrong appeals his convictions for three armed bank robberies. We *953 agree with appellant that the trial court erred in excluding evidence which indicated that another man may have committed one of the robberies, and we reverse his conviction on that count. The