Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “United States v. MENDOZA-Sanchez”
United States v. Mendoza-Sanchezpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 19-1091 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. ROBERTO MENDOZA-SÁNCHEZ, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]
United States v. Mendoza-Sanchezpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D REVISED AUGUST 10, 2006 July 14, 2006 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit
United States v. Luis Mendoza-Sanchezpublic domain
PER CURIAM: I. Luis Mendoza-Sanchez (Mendoza) pled guilty to violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) by being found in the United States, without permission, following both his conviction for an aggravated felony and later deportation. The district court increased Mendoza’s offense level by 16 levels because his deportation occurred following his convicti
Martin Mendoza-Sanchez v. Loretta Lynchpublic domain
POSNER, Circuit Judge. The petitioner, a citizen of Mexico, asks us to vacate an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an immigration judge’s denial of his application, based on the Convention Against Torture (an international convention to which the United States belongs), for deferral of removal. He contends that removal (which would mean returning him to Mexic
GOODWIN, Circuit Judge: Jose Flores-Sanchez (“Sanchez”) appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 1 He assigns error to: (1) denial of his motion to dismiss the indictments; (2) commencement of trial one day after his first appearance on the superseding in
United States v. Sanchez-Mendozapublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Rodolfo Sanchez-Mendoza pleaded guilty to being an alien in the United States after deportation, 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He challenges his sentence, arguing that the district court should have departed downward based on “cultural assimilation” and that his attorney was ineffective for not conducting more investigation prior to sentencing and for waiving the presentence report. We reject these argume
Sanchez-Mendoza v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
State of Tennessee v. Luis Mendoza-Sanchezpublic domain
03/24/2025 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs January 22, 2025 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. LUIS MENDOZA-SANCHEZ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. 85743 James A. Turner, Judge ___________________________________
Alvarez-Mendoza v. United States and Martinez-Sanchez, AKA Marin, AKA Marin-Olivarez, AKA Castaneda v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 922 (first judgment) and 923 (second judgment).
336 F.3d 739 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Rogelio PRECIADO, also known as Emilio Mendoza-Valencia, Defendant-Appellant.United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee.v.Pablo Borges-Cano, also known as Jaimie Samorano Defendant-Appellant.United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Humberto Sanchez, also known as Humberto Sanchez-Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant. No. 02-3124.<
Sanchez-Mendoza v. Mukaseypublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying petitioner’s motion to reopen removal proceedings. Respondent’s motion for summary disposition in part is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9
Sanchez-Mendoza v. Gonzalespublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The Clerk shall amend the docket to reflect this status. Respondent’s unopposed motion for summary disposition is granted because the questions raised by this petition for review are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (sta
United States v. Yepizpublic domain
ORDER The opinion and partial dissent filed December 20, 2016, arid' appearing at 844 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2016), are withdrawn. The opinion may not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit. A concurrently issued amended memorandum disposition ' addresses all of the issues before the court. Pursuant to the court’s May 31, 2017 order (No.
United States v. Yepizpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-50051 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. CR-05-00578- JFW-7 MANUEL YEPIZ, AKA Martin Sanchez, Seal G and Pony; Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 07-50062 Plainti
Garcia-Melendres v. United Statespublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Plascencia-Acosta v. United Statespublic domain
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
United States v. Sanchezpublic domain
PER CURIAM: * Saul Aaron Mendoza Sanchez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction for reentry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Sanchez argues that his sentence should be vacated and remanded because the district court sentenced him under the mandatory guidelines scheme held unconstitutional in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005
Cruz v. United Statespublic domain
*1013C. A. 5th Cir. Reported below: 888 F. 3d 150; C. A. 9th Cir. Reported below: 106 Fed. Appx. 618; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 981; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 126 F^d. Appx. 468; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 127 Fed. Appx. 478; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 120 Fed. Appx. 785;
Smith v. United Statespublic domain
*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
Cruz v. United Statespublic domain
*1013C. A. 5th Cir. Reported below: 888 F. 3d 150; C. A. 9th Cir. Reported below: 106 Fed. Appx. 618; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 981; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 126 F^d. Appx. 468; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 127 Fed. Appx. 478; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 120 Fed. Appx. 785;