Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Pereyra v. Pereyra”
People v. Pereyrapublic domain
People v Pereyra (2019 NY Slip Op 00907) People v Pereyra 2019 NY Slip Op 00907 Decided on February 6, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary La
United States v. Pereyrapublic domain
U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________ No. 201600395 _________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. ROBERTO PEREYRA, JR. Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps Appellan
Pereyra v. Sedkypublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS ALLISON D. BURROUGHS, DISTRICT JUDGE BURROUGHS, DISTRICT JUDGE. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Roberto Pereyra (“Pereyra”) and City Fitness Group, LLC filed this action against Defendants Herve Sedky (“Sedky”), and five limited liability corporations that Sedky allegedly controls: KLIO Fitness Clubs, LLC; KLIO
People v. Pereyrapublic domain
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), rendered July 1, 2008, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed. The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbi
United States v. Pereyra-Equihuapublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Ricardo Pereyra-Equihua appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 132-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Pereyra-Equihua’s counsel has filed a brief stat
Commonwealth v. Pereyrapublic domain
ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 21st day of June, 2004, the order of the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas is reversed insofar as it declared the Registration of Sexual Offenders Act unconstitutional, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. See Commonwealth v. Williams, 574 Pa. 487, 832 A.2d 962 (2003); Commonwealth v. Maldonado, 576 Pa. 101, 838 A.2d 710 (2003)
United States v. Pereyra-Gabinopublic domain
563 F.3d 322 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Braulio PEREYRA-GABINO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-2869. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: March 12, 2009. Filed: April 16, 2009. *323 J. Keith Rigg, argued, Des Moines, IA, for appellant. Andrew H. Kahl, AUSA, a
Commonwealth v. Pereyrapublic domain
*234 ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 21st day of June, 2004, the order of the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas is reversed insofar as it declared the Registration of Sexual Offenders Act unconstitutional, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. See Commonwealth v. Williams, 574 Pa. 487, 832 A.2d 962 (2003); Comm
Siller Preferred Services, LLC v. Ana Piedra Bravo, Kevin Pereyra, and Bravo-Drewy Enterprises, LLCpublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED FEBRUARY 28, 2025 NO. 03-23-00234-CV Siller Preferred Services, LLC, Appellant v. Ana Piedra Bravo, Kevin Pereyra, and Bravo-Drewy Enterprises, LLC, Appellees APPEAL FROM THE 455TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES
United States v. Braulio Pereyra-Gabinopublic domain
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-2869 ___________ United States of America, * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the
United States v. Escalante-Pereyrapublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Mario Jesus Escalante-Pereyra appeals from his jury-trial conviction and sentence of time served for unlawful reentry by a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Escalante-Pereyra’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion t
State v. Pereyrapublic domain
18 P.3d 146 (2001) 199 Ariz. 352 STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. George Teodoro PEREYRA, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR 99-0809. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department E. February 6, 2001. *147 Janet Napolitano, Attorney General, by Randall M. Howe, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals Section and Galen H.
Siller Preferred Services, LLC v. Ana Piedra Bravo, Kevin Pereyra, and Bravo-Drewy Enterprises, LLCpublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-23-00234-CV Siller Preferred Services, LLC, Appellant v. Ana Piedra Bravo, Kevin Pereyra, and Bravo-Drewy Enterprises, LLC, Appellees FROM THE 455TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-GN-21-002061, THE HONORABLE MAYA GUERRA GAMBLE, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM O
Pereyra v. Ashcroftpublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Magdalena Escobar Pereyra appeals pro se1 from the district court’s judgment denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the Immigration Judge’s order finding her removable because of her conviction of a controlled substance offense and an aggravated felony. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Flores-Miramontes v. INS, 212 F.3d
United States v. Morales-Pereyrapublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Aurelio Morales-Pereyra appeals the judgment of conviction and 57-month sentence imposed after his guilty plea to being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Morales-Pereyra contends that in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), the district court improperly imposed a senten
Pereyra v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Pereyra v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
Pereyra v. Inspublic domain
923 F.2d 845 Pereyrav.INS NO. 90-4095 United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. DEC 05, 1990 1 Appeal From: I.N.S. 2 DENIED.
United States v. Pereyrapublic domain
622 F.2d 577 U. S.v.Pereyra 79-1319 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Second Circuit 3/3/80 1 E.D.N.Y. DISMISSED
PEREYRApublic domain
Interim Decision #2667 MATTER OF PEREYRA In Deportation Proceedings A-21026629 Decided by Board August 10, 1978 An exchange visitor who is no longer subject to the foreign residence requirement in view of the amendment of section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act is not precluded from establishing statutory eligibility for suspension of deportation not- withstan