Cases

MEMORANDUM *** Raymundo Gavino-Mariscal appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)®; and 846; and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(ii)(II); and 846. Pursuant to

817 F.2d 754 *U.S.v.Gavino 86-2433 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. 4/14/87 1 S.D.Tex. AFFIRMED 2 ---------------

15 F.3d 1091NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Gavino DAMIAN-GALAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-50569. United States

MEMORANDUM ** Gustavo Evaristo Cuevas-Gavino appeals his guilty-plea conviction and 57-month sentence for being found in the United States after having been previously deported, 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), Cuevas-Gavino’s counsel has filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, along

BAUER, Circuit Judge. Gavino Cruz-Moyaho has been fighting his removal from the United States since 2005. He claims that his removal would lead to “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to his three United States-citizen children so his removal should be can-celled under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b). The immigration judge (IJ) denied Cruz-Moya-ho’s application for cancellation in O

OPINION and ORDER GUSTAVO A. GELPÍ, United States' District Judge In this Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 (2004) antitrust case, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, asserting that the Sherman Act does not apply to Puerto Rico because it is not a State. (Docket No. 41.) In response, the Government argues that Puerto Rico is indeed a State for the purposes of the Sherman Act since Cór

PER CURIAM. Frank Gavino, a resident of Tucson, Arizona, and one of five defendants named in an indictment filed in the Northern District of New York charging violation of the narcotics laws, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, has petitioned us for a writ of prohibition and mandamus directed to Judge Lloyd F. MacMahon, sitting by designation in the Northern District of New York, to stay an order issued by him in open court on

MEMORANDUM ** Defendant-Appellant Gavino MartinezArasola appeals his jury conviction and 51-month sentence imposed for illegal reentry following removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We affirm. 1. Appellant was not entitled to a jury instruction on the defense theory that the Attorney General’s consent to reapply for admission was not required, because that theory was not supported b

MEMORANDUM ** Assuming that the use of physical restraints at Zaragoza’s sentencing hearing and during his allocution was error, such error was harmless. Williams v. Woodford, 306 F.3d 665, 689 (9th Cir.2002); United States v. Mack, 200 F.3d 653, 657 (9th Cir.2000). Nor was Zaragoza denied equal protection. The use of restraints was “intimately related to the State’

MEMORANDUM** Gavino Medina Virgen appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Virgen’s contention that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), renders 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) & (B) unconstitutional is foreclosed by United States v. Buckland, 277 F.3

499 F.2d 1191 Frank GAVINO, Petitioner,v.Hon. Lloyd F. MacMAHON, United States District Judge,Southern District of New York, Sitting byDesignation in the Northern District ofNew York, Respondent.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,v.Frank GAVINO et al., Defendants. No. 1184, Docket 74-1785. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argue

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. I. INTRODUCTION After the district court denied Gavino Nava-Ramirez’s motion to suppress evi *1130 dence discovered in the trunk of a vehicle he was driving but which he did not own, Nava-Ramirez entered a conditional guilty plea to one count of po

ORDER ROLL, District Judge. Pending before the Court are Gerardo Vizcarra-Ruiz and Jose Padilla-Avedano’s motions to suppress physical evidence seized by law enforcement agents. Defendants Vizcarra-Ruiz and Padilla-Avedano chair lenge the legality of the search of a parked vehicle from which law enforcement officers seized a quantity of drugs. Neither defendant was in or near the vehicle at the time of

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-2823 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kelvin Baez

COLLOTON, Circuit Judge. After Rodolfo Anguiano, Jr., was indicted on drug charges, he moved to suppress evidence on the ground that his arrest and subsequent searches of his hotel room and vehicle violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment. The district court 1 granted the motion in part, but ruled that s

GARWOOD, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a denial of a preliminary injunction and the dismissal of an action for damages filed pursuant to the due process clause of the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, based on a finding that appellant had no property interest in continued employment. We affirm.

890 F.Supp. 1375 (1995) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Jake BAKER and Arthur Gonda, Defendants. Crim. No. 95-80106. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. June 21, 1995. *1376 *1377 *1378 Kenneth R. Chadwell, Asst. U.S. Att

DeCICCO, Judge: A general court-martial composed of officer members convicted the appellant, contrary to his pleas, of attempted forcible sodomy in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice [UCMJ], 10 U.S.C. § 880. The court sentenced the appellant to confine*728ment for 1 year, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to pay grade E-l, and a ba

HAYNSWORTH, Circuit Judge: When, in this diversity action, it appeared that the defendant was a resident of Virginia, the District Court declined to permit the plaintiff to renounce his allegation that he, the plaintiff, was a resident of Virginia. The District Judge thereupon dismissed the action for want of diversity. We affirm

572 F.Supp. 1547 (1983) UNITED STATES of America v. Penyu Baychev KOSTADINOV, a/k/a "Penyo B. Kostadinov", a/k/a "Penu B. Kostadinov", Defendant. No. 83 Cr. 616 (Part I) (DNE). United States District Court, S.D. New York. October 19, 1983. *1548 Rudolph W. Giuliani, U.S. Atty., S.D. N.Y., New York City (Ruth G. Wedgwood, Asst. U.