Cases

210 P.3d 578 (2009) STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Ramiro R. NEVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. State of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Marco Antonio Jimenez, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 34692, 34902. Court of Appeals of Idaho. April 21, 2009. Review Denied June 24 and July 13, 2009. *580 Nevin, B

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-23-00348-CR ___________________________ JASINTO JIMENEZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 30th District Court Wichita County, Texas Trial Court No. DC30-CR2022-0995 Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack

ORLANDO L. GARCIA, Chief United States District Judge On this day, the Court considered Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Indictment (docket no. 23) (the "Motion to Dismiss") and the Government's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Dismissing the Indictment (docket no. 31) (the "Motion to Reconsider"). After reviewing the motions and each party's original and supplemental briefing, the Court finds that the Government's Motion to Reco

Appellate Case: 24-6257 Document: 42-1 Date Filed: 12/16/2025 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH December 16, 2025

WATFORD, Circuit Judge, concurring: I join the court’s opinion but write separately to highlight one aspect of the court’s reasoning that I cannot fully embrace. The court holds that, even though we are reversing in part the district court’s denial of Lustig’s motion to suppress, he’s not automatically entitled to withdraw his guilty plea. Instead, the court concludes that we must engage in “harmless error

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

633 F.Supp. 287 (1986) Guillermo ROSARIO NEVAREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Jaime TORRES GAZTAMBIDE, et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 85-1117 HL. United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. March 31, 1986. *288 Frank Rodríguez García, Ponce, P.R., for plaintiffs. Carlos del Valle, Ramirez & Ramirez, Edificio Tres Rios, Hato

820 F.2d 525 Guillermo ROSARIO NEVAREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees,v.Honorable Jaime TORRES GAZTAMBIDE, et al., Defendants, Appellants. No. 86-1655. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Submitted April 9, 1987.Decided June 5, 1987. Jose A. Sanchez Alvarez, Hector Rivera Cruz, Secretary of Justi

MEMORANDUM * Heriberto Valencia pled guilty to illegal reentry after deportation, 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), and was sentenced to thirty-seven months in prison. He challenges the adequacy of his plea colloquy with the magistrate judge and the eight-level aggravated felony sentencing enhancement imposed by the district court. Because Valencia did not make either of these arguments in the district court, we review

662 F.Supp. 1218 (1987) UNITED STATES of America v. Victor Manuel GERENA, et al. No. Cr. H-85-50 (TEC). United States District Court, D. Connecticut. June 3, 1987. *1219 *1220 *1221 *1222 *1

650 F.3d 350 (2011) Luisa PEREZ; Elvin Francisco Gonza Osovio, Individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MOUNTAIRE FARMS, INCORPORATED, a Delaware Corporation; Mountaire Farms of Delaware, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation, Defendants-Appellants, and Ray Barrientos; Maria Gomez; Juana Miguel; Gibran Moya Rivera; Gloria Paneto Castro; Shitwa Perez Lopez; Jose Antonio Santiag Lugo; Maritza Alcover

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS February 4, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _______

981 P.2d 595 (1999) 194 Ariz. 295 STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Diane Lee THOMPSON, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR 98-0296. Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department D. April 27, 1999. *596 Janet A. Napolitano, The Attorney General by Paul J. McMurdie, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals Section and J.D. Ni

ORDER ON PLAN H358 XAVIER RODRIGUEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This Order addresses Plaintiffs’ statutory and constitutional claims against Plan H358, enacted by the 83rd Texas Legislature in 2013. The following Plaintiffs assert claims against Plan H358: The Texas Latino Redistricting Task Force1 (limited to HD90), MALC,2 th

Case: 18-70001 Document: 130-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/23/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 23, 2025

KELSEY, J., dissenting. The majority opinion imposes a duty to inquire, ante, 48 Va.App. at 574-576, 633 S.E.2d at 214-216, on police officers whenever there appears any ambiguity in the scope of their consensual searching. This proposition strikes me as an unwarranted departure from existing Fourth Amendment doctrine, which historically has examined the p

OPINION AND ORDER LAFFITTE, District Judge. Plaintiff Gladys Serrano claims her constitutional or civil rights, guaranteed by the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments were violated. Plaintiff Serrano was removed from her position as Director of Employment Security Bureau of the Department of Labor and Human Resources. This is a position of trust and confidence under the Puerto Rico Public Service Personnel

815 F.Supp.2d 448 (2011) In re PUERTO RICAN CABOTAGE ANTITRUST LITIGATION. MDL No. 3:08-md-1960 (DRD). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. September 13, 2011. *450 H. Laddie Montague, Jr., Ruthanne Gordon, Berger & Montague, PC, Philadelphia, PA, Maria D. Bertolez-Elvira, Nestor Mendez-Gomez, Pietrantoni Mendoz & Alvare

OPINION AND ORDER PEREZ-GIMENEZ, District Judge. This matter is now before us upon plaintiffs’ appeal of the Opinion and Order of February 22, 1984, entered by Magistrate Justo Arenas. Defendants have replied to plaintiffs’ opposition, and sundry memoranda have been filed with the Court. The appeal from said Opinion and Order basically involves two areas. First, the Magistrate’s concrete

783 F.Supp. 970 (1992) Bobby STOTT, Joseph Register, and Lonnie Michael Cayton, Plaintiffs, v. James G. MARTIN, et al., Defendants. Nos. 85-818-CIV-5-BR, 86-650-CIV-5-BR and 86-683-CIV-5-BR. United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Raleigh Division. February 12, 1992. *971 *972 Melin