⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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.

7 opinions for “United States v. Maravilla-Leon”

District Court, S.D. California · 2015-12-08 · Published · cited 0× · 150 F. Supp. 3d 1201; 2015 WL 8482756; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164476
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT DUE TO INVALID DEPORTATION Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel, United States District Judge Before the Court is Defendant Jose Luis Garcia-Morales’ (“Defendant”) October 16, 2015 motion to dismiss his indictment due to invalid deportation. Def. Mot., ECF No. 33. The motion has been fully briefed. Pl. Resp., ECF No. 34; Def. Reply, ECF No. 35. Upon consideration of the movin
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009-06-19 · Published · cited 38× · 568 F.3d 1203; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14479; 2009 WL 1725957
568 F.3d 1203 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio ROBERTSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-3126. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. June 19, 2009. *1206 Terrence J. Campbell, Barber Emerson, L.C., Lawrence, KS, for Defendant-Appellant. Leon Patton, Assistant United States Attorney (Mar
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008-02-25 · Published · cited 45× · 516 F.3d 923; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 4018; 2008 WL 483281
516 F.3d 923 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Edward Leon FIELDS, Jr., Defendant-Appellant. State of Oklahoma, Amicus Curiae. No. 05-7128. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. February 25, 2008. *924 *925 *926 Vicki Mand
Avagyan v. Holderpublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011-07-01 · Published · cited 445× · 646 F.3d 672; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13393; 2011 WL 2586275
Opinion by Judge B. FLETCHER; Dissent by Judge CALLAHAN. OPINION B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge: Elza Avagyan petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA’s) denial as untimely of her motion to reopen removal proceedings to apply for adjustment of status, on account of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). See De Mart
Lucena v. Gonzalespublic domain
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006-12-26 · Published · cited 0× · 215 F. App'x 627
MEMORANDUM *** Jesus Hernandez Lucena and Santa Delia Partida Flores (together, “Petitioners”) petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their motion to reopen in absentia removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings.1
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007-06-15 · Published · cited 284× · 488 F.3d 142; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 14026; 2007 WL 1720048
OPINION OF THE COURT POLLAK, District Judge. On May 7, 2004, an Immigration Judge (IJ) ordered that Soriba Fadiga be removed to Guinea. Fadiga moved to reopen the removal proceedings, Fadiga’s counsel acknowledging that he had provided ineffective assistance in presenting Fa-diga’s application for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007-06-15 · Published · cited 0×
Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 6-15-2007 Fadiga v. Atty Gen USA Precedential or Non-Pre