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 “Rudy Villarreal”
Luis Hess v. Rudy Villarrealpublic domain
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS 13-14-00057-CV Luis Hess v. Rudy Villarreal On Appeal from the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas Trial Cause No. C-4354-13-E JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT
Luis Hess v. Rudy Villarrealpublic domain
NUMBER 13-14-00057-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ LUIS HESS, Appellant, v. RUDY VILLARREAL, Appellee. _________________________________________________
Luis Hess v. Rudy Villarrealpublic domain
FILE COPY M A N D A T E TO THE 275TH DISTRICT COURT of HIDALGO COUNTY, GREETINGS: Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 30th day of December, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between Luis Hess, Appellant, v
United States v. Torrespublic domain
WISDOM, Senior Circuit Judge: I. Introduction Rudy Villarreal Torres pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).1 A chrome-plated .38-caliber handgun and the heroin were found under the driver’s seat in Torres’s
Garcia, Rudy Alvaradopublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-77,695-02 EX PARTE RUDY ALVARADO GARCIA, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. CR41780 IN THE 385TH DISTRICT COURT FROM MIDLAND COUNTY Per curiam. ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of Article
Villarreal v. Statepublic domain
A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated assault and the trial court assessed punishment at ten years in the Texas Department of Corrections. Appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction. We agree, and therefore address only the dispositive points of error. The indictment alleged that appellant stabbed the victim "with a sharp object to the grand jurors unknown." Appellant contends that the State failed to prove this allegation. Where
Rudy Valdez v. the State of Texaspublic domain
NUMBER 13-23-00223-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG RUDY VALDEZ, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE 377TH DISTRICT COURT
Villarreal v. City of San Antoniopublic domain
657 S.W.2d 175 (1983) Elsa VILLARREAL, Appellant, v. The CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Appellee. No. 04-82-00021-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. July 27, 1983. Rehearing Denied September 6, 1983. *176 Rudy Garza, Tinsman & Houser, Inc., San Antonio, for appellant. N. Mark Ralls, Steve Arronge, San A
Raul (Roy) Morales v. Rudy Segurapublic domain
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-15-00365-CV Raul (Roy) MORALES, Appellant v. Rudy SEGURA,
Rudy Holguin Dominguez v. Statepublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00381-CR Rudy Holguin Dominguez, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. A-09-1072-SB, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING OPINION
Raul (Roy) Morales v. Rudy Segurapublic domain
ACCEPTED 04-15-00365-CV FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 8/14/2015 4:57:30 PM
Rudy Holguin Dominguez v. Statepublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00381-CR Rudy Holguin Dominguez, Appellant v.
Villarreal v. Statepublic domain
821 S.W.2d 682 (1991) Roland VILLARREAL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 04-89-00535-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, San Antonio. November 20, 1991. *683 Pat McKay, San Antonio, for appellant. Fred G. Rodriguez, Steven C. Hilbig, Edward F. Shaughnessy, III, Criminal Dist. Attys., San Antonio, for appellee.</
Steve Moore v. Citgo Refining & Chemicals Cpublic domain
Case: 12-41292 Document: 00512437666 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/12/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 12, 2013 No. 12-41175
Dominguez v. Statepublic domain
363 S.W.3d 926 (2012) Rudy Holguin DOMINGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 03-10-00381-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Austin. March 29, 2012. *928 Claire Carter, Assistant District Attorney, San Angelo, TX, Lisa C. McMinn, State Prosecuting Attorney, Austin, TX, for appellee. John E. Sutton, San Angelo,
in Re Nettie Bivenspublic domain
NUMBER 13-20-00563-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG IN RE NETTIE BIVENS, ET AL. On Petition for Writ of Injunction. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion
Tesoro v. Alvarezpublic domain
OPINION This is an interlocutory appeal from the trial court's denial of appellant Leonard Tesoro, M.D.'s motion to dismiss appellee Emma Alvarez's claims on the basis that she failed to comply with Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 74.351. TEX. CIV. PRAC. REM. CODE ANN. § 74.351 (Vernon Supp. 2008) (requiring that an expert report must be filed timely in health care li
Charles Garza v. Statepublic domain
NUMBER 13-16-00245-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG CHARLES GARZA, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. On appeal from the 347th District Court
Brian James Matew v. the State of Texaspublic domain
NUMBER 13-20-00062-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG BRIAN JAMES MATEW, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. On appeal from the 218th District Court of
United States v. Hernandezpublic domain
BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge: Maria and Rutilio Hernandez (“Appellants”) jointly appeal their convictions and sentences for six counts of conspiracy, each arising out of illegal drug activity. For the reasons below, we affirm each of Appellants’ convictions and sentences. I. BACKGROUND The Government charged Appellants b