Cases

MEMORANDUM ** Elmer Villanueva-Escobar appeals his 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being found in the United States after illegal re-entry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Villanueva-Escobar contends that the district court violated his constitutional rights by imposing a sentence in excess of the

350 F.3d 1216 Rowdy D. ADAMS, Ricardo E. Aguirre, Sheri L. Althoff, Luis R. Alvarado, Luis A. Amavizca, Paul H. Ammerman, Paul A. Anderson, Jaime M. Arras, Larry G. Arthurs, Larry H. Arthurs, Martha I. Arvizu, James R. Ash, David J. Astle, John T. Attanasio, Meri L. Axberg, Albert Bailey, Jr., Robert V. Bakowski, Donald L. Barley, John C. Bates, James W. Baumann, Paul A. Beeson, James S. Bendorf, David P. Bennett, Frank J. Beverly, William L. Black

MICHEL, Circuit Judge. This suit was brought by certain present and former United States Border Patrol agents, alleging that the government wrongly and willfully failed to pay the plaintiffs overtime wages at a time-and-a-half rate as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 207(a). The government conceded that the plaintiffs had not been paid for overtime, but contended that all of the various position

ORDER Upon consideration of Kevin A. Barnes, et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss their appeal, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

LINN, Circuit Judge. ORDER Kevin Barnes et al. (Barnes) notify the court that the United States Court of Federal Claims has requested that this court dismiss “the entire matter on appeal, without prejudice, and remand to this court for the purpose of addressing all outstanding matters.” We treat Barnes’ notification as a motion to remand. The United States has not responded. On

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2276 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Michael Allen Voelz Defen

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit Nos. 18-1687 19-1750 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. NOE SALVADOR PÉREZ-VÁSQUEZ, a/k/a Crazy, Defendant, Appellant. Nos. 19-1027 19-1745 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v

Andrew S. Hanen, United States District Court Judge Omar Hernandez Lozano ("Hernandez Lozano") and Juan Gabriel Ruiz-Baena ("Ruiz-Baena") are charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and § 1326(a) respectively. They seek to have their indictments dismissed because the

Andrew S. Hanen, United States District Judge *708Juan Angel Porras-Avila ("Porras-Avila" or "Defendant") is charged with illegal reentry into the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). He seeks to have his indictment dismissed bec

ROBERT PITMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *707Before the Court is Defendant Antonio Armijo-Banda's ("Armijo-Banda") motion to dismiss the pending indictment. (Dkt. 18). Having considered the parties' briefs, the evidence, and the relevant law, the Court enters the following order. I. BACKGROUND

HAYNES, Circuit Judge: Julio Cesar Fernandez appeals his conviction and sentence, arguing the district court erred while calculating his range of imprisonment under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.” or the “Guidelines”). Fernandez argues the district court erred both by applying a six-level enhancement for making a ransom demand and by declining to apply a two-,

SELYA, Circuit Judge. Challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and alleging instructional error, defendant-appellant Elvin Gomez asks us to reverse (or, at least, set aside) his conviction for conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine (cocaine base). Should we refuse this entreaty, he seeks vacation of his sentence. Discerning no error, we affirm both his conviction and sentence. <

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 04-1820 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Distri

*888 BEAM, Circuit Judge. Ken and Robert Fleck were each convicted following a jury trial of one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Both Ken and Robert Fleck appeal (1) the district court’s decision to allow trial testimony regarding another alleged c

859 F.2d 1354 57 USLW 2292 COMPANIA MEXICANA DE AVIACION, S.A., a corporation doingbusiness as Mexicana Airlines, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, Respondent,andAdela Espinosa De Penasco, Carlos Penasco Garcia, PatriciaGuadarrama Ortiz, Rodolfo Guadarrama Ortiz, Raul GuadarammaOrtiz, Ana Maria Esperanza Cuellar Marovilla, Federico PerezM

PER CURIAM: * Compañía Mexicana de Aviación (Mexica-na) flight 940 crashed at Michoacan, Mexico, shortly after takeoff from Mexico City on March 31, 1986, killing all aboard. This action is brought on behalf of 69 Mexican decedents who travelled on tickets purchased in Mexico for travel within Mexico. Mexicana moved to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction because of

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Sentenced on a guilty plea for immigration-related violations, Yolanda C. Lara appeals her sentence. Concluding that the district court erred in applying the sentencing guidelines in one particular, we vacate and remand for resentencing. I. Factual Background. Following an investigati

NOONAN, Circuit Judge: Alvaro Julio Echavarria-Olarte (Echavar-ria) appeals his conviction of two conspiracies to import and distribute cocaine in the United States and of interstate and foreign travel in aid of a racketeering enterprise. We affirm his convictions. PROCEEDINGS Echavarria was indicted together with Simon Castoreña

63 U.S. 161 (1859) 22 How. 161 JUAN JOSE GONZALES, APPELLANT, v. THE UNITED STATES. Supreme Court of United States. It was argued by Mr. Hepburn, upon a brief filed by himself and Mr. Volney E. Howard, for the appellant, and by Mr. Stanton for the United States. *165 Mr. Justice McLEAN delivered the opinion of the

Case: 22-60505 Document: 00516892233 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/12/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED September 12, 2023