Cases

JONES, United States District Judge This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Felix Jara-Medina's (Jara) Motion to Dismiss Indictment. (# 25) For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Jara's Motion. BACKGROUND Jara is charged with Illegal Reentry having been ordered removed from the United States on two prior occasions. Jara's original order of removal occurred in February

ROSE, District Judge. Defendant-Appellant, Raul Jara, appeals the sentence imposed upon him after his original sentence was vacated by the United States Supreme Court for reconsideration in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Jara claims that the district court has now erred by sentencing him under the mistaken understanding that it was bound to impose a “reasonable”

ORDER Raul Jara appeals from his judgment of conviction and sentence. The government has waived oral argument, and this court construes Jara’s failure to respond to its show cause letter concerning oral argument as a waiver of such argument. Further, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). In 2003, Jara pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the attempted manu

62 F.3d 399 U.S.v.Jara** NO. 93-5074 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. July 19, 1995 Appeal From: S.D.Fla., No. 91-00702-CR-SH 1 AFFIRMED.

Easterbrook, Circuit Judge. Like United States v. Patrick, 842 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 2016), this appeal concerns the use of a cell-site simulator to locate someone. And like Patrick it does not require us to determine when, if ever, the use of this device must be authorized by a warrant supported by probable

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

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLR &?R4:O58<6R  R
RR
 
@R  
@R R 
R
 R
O

@R  
 ?R LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLR
''#R)&$R+R% +R++*R

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLR &?R4:O58<6R  R
RR
 
@R  
@R R 
R
 R
O

@R  
 ?R LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLR
''#R)&$R+R% +R++*R

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: The Defendant-Appellant Juan Francisco Jara-Favela (“Jara-Favela”) appeals his convictions for attempted illegal reentry and for making a false statement to Customs and Border Patrol (“CBP”) agents. We AFFIRM. I This appeal arises out of Jara-Favela’s attempt to illegally reenter the United

Petition for rehearing denied.

MEMORANDUM ** After pleading guilty to illegally reentering the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, Rodrigo Vera-Jara appeals the district court’s application of a 16-point enhancement under the United States Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”) based on a finding that Vera-Jara had committed a crime of violence prior to being deported. U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii). We affirm.

543 U.S. 1102 JARAv.UNITED STATES. No. 04-5352. Supreme Court of United States. January 24, 2005. 1 C. A. 6th Cir. Reported below: 96 Fed. Appx. 329; Motions of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted, judgments vacated, and cases rem

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

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

BEAM, Circuit Judge. Following a jury trial, Cesar Raul Jara was convicted of one count of possession with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 851. Jara appeals, alleging insufficiency of the evidence. He also contends that the district court 1 </

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 06-1823 ___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v.

120 F.3d 265 U.S.v.Silva-Jara* NO. 96-20846 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. June 26, 1997 Appeal From: S.D.Tex. ,No.CRH96151 1 Affirmed.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

510 U.S. 1169 De La Jarav.United States. No. 93-7624. Supreme Court of United States. February 28, 1994. 1 Appeal from the C. A. 9th Cir. 2 Certiorari denied. Reported below: 9 F.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.