Cases

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

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

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime Orlando Cruz-Benitez 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). Cruz-Benitez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the rel

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-4539 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. UNDER SEAL, Defendant - Appellant. No. 15-4569 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. UNDER SEAL,

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

ORDER Jaime Barraza Cruz (“Barraza”), a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to being in the United States without permission after his removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). In his plea agreement Barraza waived the right to appeal “his conviction and any part of his sentence.” Barraza has an extensive criminal history, including two previous drug convictions, and he committed the current offense within two years of his last release from

ORDER Jaime Barraza Cruz (“Barraza”), a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to being in the United States without permission after his removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). In his plea agreement Barraza waived the right to appeal “his conviction and any part of his sentence.” Barraza has an extensive criminal history, including two previous drug convictions, and he committed the current offense within two years of his last release from

508 F.3d 741 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marco Antonio RABANAL, also known as Marco Rabanal-Gal, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco Villegas-Jaimes, also known as Francisco Peralta-Jaimes, also known as Francisco Villegas-Pancho, also known as Ignacio Souliz, also known as Pancho, also known as Jose Cruz Castillo, also known as Joe Cruz Castillo-Guzman, also know

*1180C. A. 6th Cir. Reported below: 100 Fed. Appx. 524; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 116 Fed. Appx. 247; C. A. 5th Cir. Reported below: 104 Fed. Appx. 436; C. A. 8th Cir. Reported below: 367 F. 3d 805; *1181No. 04-7844. No

PER CURIAM: * Rogaciano Jaimes Betancourt-Cruz appeals his sentence imposed following his guilty conviction plea for illegal reentry into United States following deportation. Betancourt-Cruz was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 57 months, to be followed by a three-year term of supervised release. We need not decide the applicability of the waivers in this case because the issues raised by Bet

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

(Reported below: 71 Fed. Appx. 384); (72 Fed. Appx. 957); (71 Fed. Appx. 437); (72 Fed. Appx. 971); (72 Fed. Appx. 962); (74 Fed. Appx. 357); (73 Fed. Appx. 75); (71 Fed. Appx. 397); (72 Fed. Appx. 955); (72 Fed. Appx. 961); (72 Fed. Appx. 960); (72 Fed. Appx. 954);

(Reported below: 71 Fed. Appx. 384); (72 Fed. Appx. 957); (71 Fed. Appx. 437); (72 Fed. Appx. 971); (72 Fed. Appx. 962); (74 Fed. Appx. 357); (73 Fed. Appx. 75); (71 Fed. Appx. 397); (72 Fed. Appx. 955); (72 Fed. Appx. 961); (72 Fed. Appx. 960); (72 Fed. Appx. 954);

GAJARSA, Circuit Judge. ORDER The United States moves for summary affirmance of the April 30, 1998 order of the United States District Court for the Central District of California granting the United States’ motion for summary judgment. Leonardo Nery et al. oppose. Nery et al. served the United States as New Philippine Scouts during and after World War II. Nery et al. filed a civil action

PER CURIAM.* Jaime De La Cruz appeals his guilty plea conviction for possession with the intent to distribute more than 1000 kilograms of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. He argues that 21 U.S.C. § 841 is unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). De La Cruz concedes that this court rejected his argument in Uni

JOHN M. WALKER, JR., Circuit Judge: Defendants-appellants Angel Padilla and Ivan Rodriguez appeal from a June 30, 1998 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Charles S. Haight, Senior District Judge. They allege numerous errors in the proceedings below, all but three of which are rejected in a separate summary order filed concurrently with this opinion. We summarize only the facts

Appendix A Department of Justice Chart Documenting Sentences in Capitol Breach Cases Monday, January 6, 2025 SENTENCES IMPOSED IN CASES ARISING OUT OF THE EVENTS OF JANUARY 6, 2021 Disclaimer: Those relying on information contained in this document should verify all information for accuracy Table 1: Cases in which the government recommended a probation sentence without home detention 1 0F Defendant Ca