Cases

Chief Justice DURRANT, opinion of the Court: INTRODUCTION 11 Gabriel Gutierres-Perez (Defendant) pled guilty to criminally negligent automobile homicide and driving under the influence of alcohol. Before making this plea, he reserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence

Chief Justice DURRANT, opinion of the Court: INTRODUCTION T1 Gabriel Gutierrez-Perez (Defendant) pled guilty to criminally negligent automobile homicide and driving under the influence of alcohol. Before making this plea, he reserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained through a blood draw. Defendant contends that the affidavit submit

Justice BENDER, dissenting. Introduction In this death penalty prosecution, the majority reverses the trial court's disqualification of the Eighteenth Judicial District Attorney's Office. The majority misapplies precedent and fails to acknowledge the unique cireumstances and key facts that led the trial judge to take the highly unusual step of disqualifying the entire office.

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL ESPECIAL1 EL PUEBLO DE PUERTO RICO Apelación procedente del Apelada Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Sala

BYE, Circuit Judge. Jose Vinicio Ovando-Garzo pleaded guilty to one count of reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his motion to suppress evidence of his identity obtained during a traffic stop. We affirm. I

22-424-cv(L) The branch of Citibank, N.A., established in the Republic of Argentina v. De Nevares UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2022 (Argued: March 16, 2023 Decided: July 12, 2023) Docket Nos. 22-424-cv, 22-1083-cv THE BRANCH OF CITIBANK, N.A., ESTABLISHED IN TH

2022 WI 76 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2019AP2184-CR COMPLETE TITLE: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Jeffrey L. Moeser, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner. REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS

FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH November 24, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Cour

488 F.Supp.2d 1197 (2007) Elroy RENTERIA-MARIN. et al., Plaintiffs, v. AG-MART PRODUCE, INC., et al., Defendants. Marino Perez-Alvino, et al., plaintiffs, v. Ag-Mart Produce, Inc. and Green Stripe, Inc., Defendants. Nos. 3:01-CV-1392-J-25MCR, 3:02-CV-627-J-25MCR. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division. May 14, 2007.

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 08a0117p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X Plaintiff-Appellee, - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

520 F.3d 569 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Eduardo URRIETA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 07-5431. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: January 30, 2008. Decided and Filed: March 20, 2008. *570 ARGUED: Michael C. Holley, Federal Public Defender's Office, Nashville, Tenn

486 F.Supp.2d 599 (2007) UNITED STATES of America v. Luis Posada CARRILES. No. EP-07-CR-00087-KC. United States District Court, W.D. Texas, El Paso Division. May 8, 2007. *600 David B. Deitch, John Williams Van-Lonkhuyzen, Paul Edward Ahern, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney,

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2014 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

SEYMOUR, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. This is an unusual case, involving as it does an across-the-board ex ante ban on a public employee’s right to speak in his native language while at work. While I join fully in the well reasoned opinion insofar as it reverses the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the City on Plaintiffs’ discrimination

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2014 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

169 F.Supp.2d 230 (2001) Fabio ARMILIATO, Petitioner, v. Irena ZARIC-ARMILIATO, Respondent. No. 01 Civ. 0136(WHP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. May 3, 2001. *231 Robert S. Zeif, Parmet & Zeif, P.C., New York, NY, for Petitioner. Guillermo A. Gleizer, New York, NY, for Respondent. DECI

MERRITT, Chief Judge. Petitioners appeal from the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals revers *253 ing the Suspension of Deportation granted them by Immigration Judge Dennis Kramer. For the reasons stated below, we vacate the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, and remand the case

716 F.Supp. 688 (1989) Domingo COLON, Concepcion Acevedo, Felix Perez, Jose Morales and Luis Vazquez, Plaintiffs, v. CASCO, INC., Defendant. Civ. A. No. 86-0177-F. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 13, 1989. *689 J. Paterson Rae, Western Mass. Legal Services, Springfield, Mass., for plaintiffs. Brian E.

747 F.Supp.2d 599 (2010) UNITED STATES of America v. Mohammed Modin HASAN, Gabul Abdullahi Ali, Abdi Wali Dire, Abdi Mohammed Gurewardher, Abdi Mohammed Umar, Defendants. Criminal No. 2:10cr56. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Norfolk Division. October 29, 2010. *600 John S. Davis, Esq., Benjamin L. Hatch, Esq., Jerom

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellant, v.  No. 03-4375 RONALD CORTEZ FOREMAN, Defendant-Appellee.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith