Cases

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gilberto Anaya-Montoya has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ana-ya-Montoya has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. Alfred Anaya was indicted on one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine, methamphetamine (“meth”), and marijuana; and on two counts of intimidation of federal witnesses. A jury convicted him on the conspiracy charges related to cocaine and meth and on both counts of intimidation. The district court sentenced him t

715 F.Supp.2d 916 (2010) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Charles Dean ANAYA, Defendant. No. CR. 09-50055-01-KES. United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Western Division. May 27, 2010. *921 Carolyn G. Olson, U.S. Attorney's Office, Rapid City, SD, for Plaintiff. George E. Grassby, Federal Public Defender's O

629 F.3d 1091 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier ANAYA-ACOSTA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 09-50610. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted November 4, 2010. Filed January 3, 2011. *1092 Sean K. Kennedy, Federal Public Defender, and Jonathan D. Libby (argued),

MEMORANDUM *** A jury found Moisés Anaya guilty of one count of importation of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960, and one count of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court subse*581quently sentenced Anaya to time already served for both counts (392 days), followed

376 F.Supp.2d 1261 (2005) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Ramon ANAYA, Defendant. No. CR 05-0469 JB. United States District Court, D. New Mexico. July 7, 2005. David Iglesias, United States Attorney, Erlinda O. Johnson, Assistant United *1262 States Attorney, Albuquerque, NM, for Plaintiff. Naomi Salazar, Serapio L

MEMORANDUM ** Defendant Moisés Anaya appeals his conviction, challenging the district court’s decisions denying his pre-trial motions to suppress the drugs found during a border search in a tire stored in the trunk of the car he was driving and the statements he made during the interrogation that followed his arrest. We conclude that the district court did not err in denying Ana-ya’s pre-trial suppression

PER CURIAM: * Pedro Anaya-Gomez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States. He argues that the provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Anaya-Gomez’s *300constitutional challenge is foreclo

MEMORANDUM * Jaime Anaya-Zamora (“Anaya”) appeals his conviction and the sentence imposed by the district court for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), being a felon in possession of a firearm, and 26 U.S.C. §§ 5861, 5845, and 5871, possession of an unregistered firearm. Anaya contends that his conviction should be reversed because the district court erred in denying the jury instructions he requested. He fu

MEMORANDUM * The threshold issue is whether the court has jurisdiction over tMs appeal. We conclude that we do not. Appellant’s plea agreement contains a waiver of his right to appeal. “Plea agreements are contractual m nature and are measured by contract law standards.” United States v. Clark, 218 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2000) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Appellant contends

PORFILIO, Circuit Judge. In this appeal, defendant Alfredo Anaya-Enriquez argues that the district court erred by admitting evidence of his prior aggravated felony conviction at trial. We agree with Mr. Anaya-Enriquez but conclude that the district court’s error was harmless and affirm. In 1995, the government charged Mr. Ana-ya-Enriquez with illegal ree

988 F.2d 1214 U.S.v.Anaya** NO. 92-8270 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. Mar 19, 1993 1 Appeal From: W.D.Tex. 2

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Défender appointed to represent Ascención Gonzalez-Anaya has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Gonzalez-Anaya has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the rele

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

MEMORANDUM DECISION PRICE, District Judge. The defendants stand charged in this court in a three-count indictment as follows: Count 1 alleges that the defendant Ana-ya willfully procured the defendant Zavala to use and/or endeavor to use an electronic and mechanical device to intercept oral communications between the participants in a closed executive session of the Parlier City Co

615 F.Supp. 823 (1985) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Eliberto ANAYA, Defendant. No. 84 CR 934. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. July 26, 1985. *824 Steven Miller, Asst. U.S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff. William H. Theis, Chicago, Ill., for defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND

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

C. A. 1st Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

C. A. 1st Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.