Cases

19-3207-cr (L) United States of America v. Levy UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2020 (Argued: December 3, 2020 Decided: November 5, 2021) Docket Nos. 19-3207-cr/19-3209-cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Jack B. Weinstein, Senior United States District Judge: Table of Contents I. Introduction... 650 II. Facts .. .651 A. Parties’ Versions.. .651 B. Facts Found by the Court.. .654 III. Motion to Suppress ... 656 A. Physical Evidence ... 656 1. Vehicle Stop and

14-338-cr United States v. Levy 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 4 August Term, 2014 5 6 (Argued: February 2, 2015 Decided: September 29, 2015) 7 8 Docket No. 14‐338‐cr 9 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

LOHIER, Circuit Judge: The principal question presented is whether United States Customs officers at an international airport may lawfully and without a warrant examine and photocopy a document that belongs to a traveler entering the United States if the officers have reasonable suspicion on the basis of information supplied from another federal agency that the traveler is engaged in criminal activity unrelated to contraband,

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Ricky Wayne Levy 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). Levy has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflect

Order Denying Mr. Levy’s Motions To Dismiss The Indictment ADALBERTO JORDAN, District Judge. Raphael Levy has filed several pro se “commercial notices” [D.E. 42, 43, *135444, 48] and motions [D.E. 73, 75, 77] seeking to dismiss the indictment.1 Following oral argument, and for the reasons which follow, Mr.

594 F.Supp.2d 427 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. Stephen Michael LEVY, a/k/a "Reallybad@aol.com," a/k/a "Steve Levy," Defendant. No. 07 Cr. 680 (DC). United States District Court, S.D. New York. January 27, 2009. *429 Lev L. Dassin, Esq., Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, by Adam S. Hickey,

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Christopher Hem-mings appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Joseph F. Bian-co, Judge), entered on July 20, 2006, sentencing him on a guilty plea principally to 120 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release, for one count of assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(3), and one count

MEMORANDUM ** Defendant Shlomo Levy was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to import 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (Ecstasy), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute Ecstasy, aiding and abetting the importation of Ecstasy and aiding and abetting the possession with intent to distribute Ecstasy. Levy appeals his conviction and 210-month sentence on nine grounds. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S

440 F.Supp.2d 162 (2006) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. v. Kevin Pete LEVY, Defendant. No. 04 CR 559 S-1 JFB. United States District Court, E.D. New York. April 3, 2006. Adam Abensohn, Assistant United States Attorney, Monica Ryan, Assistant United States Attorney, and Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, New York, f

SUMMARY ORDER At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 9th day of August, two thousand and five. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED. Defendant-Appellant Isaac Jaco

BARKETT, Circuit Judge, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: The panel decision in this case holds that a defendant may not raise Blakely v. Washington, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004) on direct review unless it was raised in the initial appellate brief.1 Levy says that if it was not raised in the initial brief, the issue has been “wai

PER CURIAM: On June 23, 2004, and after oral argument, this Court affirmed Appellant Levy’s federal sentences. United States v. Levy, 374 F.3d 1023 (11th Cir.2004). This matter is now before the Court on Appellant Levy’s Petition for Rehearing, which we hereby deny. One matter in his Petition warrants further discussion. Appellant Levy’s Petition seeks to raise a new sentencing issue based on

PER CURIAM: Defendant Raphael R. Levy (“Levy”) entered into a written plea agreement, in which he pled guilty to two offenses and the government agreed to recommend concurrent sentences. Although the government recommended concurrent sentences at the sentencing hearing, the district court sentenced Levy to consecutive sentences for the two offenses. Levy now appeals his sentences, arguing that the government breached the p

5(&200(1'(' )25 )8//7(;7 38%/,&$7,21  8QLWHG6WDWHVY/HY\ 1R 3XUVXDQW WR 6L[WK &LUFXLW 5XOH  (/(&7521,& &,7$7,21  )(' $SS 3 WK &LU WKH VHQWHQFH DERYH WKH JXLGHOLQH UDQJH WR UHIOHFW WKH )LOH 1DPH DS QD

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1296 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Robert Morris Levy Defendant -

USCA1 Opinion

COFFIN, Senior Circuit Judge (concurring). I agree with the disposition of this appeal, but wish to express my view that certain of the court’s observations with respect to the district court’s exclusion of Levy-Cordero’s alibi evidence are premature. In my view, further factual inquiry is necessary before we can evaluate the court’s determinations regarding the seriousness of any government misleading,

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 93-1679 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. VICTOR LEVY-CORDERO, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, Senior

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 93-1679 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. VICTOR LEVY-CORDERO, Defendant - Appellant. No. 93-2015 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. WILLIAM ROMERO-LEWIS, A/K/A CACO, EL TENIENTE, Defendant - Appellant. No. 93-2087 U