Cases

THOMPSON, Circuit Judge. Stage Setting Paul Marino is a fraudster extraordinaire. Back in the early 2000s, for example, he ran a fairly elaborate scheme designed to swindle New Yorkers out of their property. In one instance Marino forged the rightful owners’ signatures on documents so he could transfer their property (without their consent, obviously) to him

654 F.3d 310 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Matthew MARINO, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 09-1965-cr. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: May 10, 2010. Decided: August 18, 2011. *311 Eugene J. Riccio, Gulash & Riccio, Bridgeport, CT, for Defendant-Appellant. Margery

731 F.Supp.2d 323 (2010) UNITED STATES of America, v. Daniel MARINO, Defendant. No. S1 09 Crim. 1243 (LAK). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 7, 2010. *324 Elie Honig, Chi T. Steve Kwok, Jason Peter Hernandez, Natalie Lamarque, U.S. Attorney's Office, New York, NY, for United States of America. Charles F.

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Daniel Marino pled guilty for his involvement in a massive financial fraud to four counts of an indictment against him: conspiring to commit investment adviser fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, substantive investment adviser fraud, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 80b-6 and 80b-17, mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 13

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Daniel Marino pled guilty for his involvement in a massive financial fraud to four counts of an indictment against him: conspiring to commit investment adviser fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, substantive investment adviser fraud, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 80b-6 and 80b-17, mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 13

MEMORANDUM ** Armando Marino-Nava appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 86-month sentence for re-entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Marino-Nava’s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided th

PER CURIAM: John Vincent Marino, II, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

204 F.Supp.2d 476 (2002) UNITED STATES of America, v. Paul MARINO, Defendant. Nos. 95 CR 0097-02(ADS), 95 CR 0571-01(ADS). United States District Court, E.D. New York. May 17, 2002. *477 Alan Vinegrad, United States Attorney, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, by Leonard Lato, Assistant United States Attorney, for U.S.</

LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Vincent Marino, a/k/a Gigi Portalla, and John Patti were members of La Cosa Nos-tra. They appeal their convictions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 (1994 & Supp. V 1999) and the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering statute (VICAR), 18 U.S.C. § 1959 (1994). RICO has proven

311 B.R. 111 (2004) In re Ellen L. MARINO, Debtor. United States of America, Appellant, v. Ellen L. Marino, Appellee. No. 6:04-CV-427-Orl-31KRS. United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division. May 12, 2004. *113 Raymond John Rotella, Kosto & Rotella, P.A., Orlando, FL, for Debtor. Hemant Sharma, Attorney Gene

129 F.Supp.2d 202 (2001) UNITED STATES of America, v. Paul MARINO, Defendant. Nos. 95 CR 0097-02, 95 CR 0571-01. United States District Court, E.D. New York. January 18, 2001. *203 Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY, by Leonard Lato, Assistant United States Attorney. Raymon

USCA1 Opinion UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 99-1618 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. VINCENT M. MARINO, a/k/a GIGI PORTALLA, Defendant, Appellant.

CYR, Senior Circuit Judge. Anthony Ciampi, Robert Carrozza, and Vincent Marino appeal from district court orders which (i) rejected their motion to bar their retrial on certain charges as to which the jury was unable to reach verdicts, and (ii) rejected their collateral estoppel challenge to the introduction of evidence relating to certain firearms. As their retrial was imminent,

176 F.3d 492 U.S.v.Marino* NO. 98-2304 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. March 08, 1999 1 Appeal From: N.D.Fla. , No.97-00084-3-CR-RV 2

134 F.3d 385 U.S.v.Marino** NO. 94-8848 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Dec 22, 1997 Appeal From: N.D.Ga. ,No.93003811CR1 1 Affirmed.

RYMER, Circuit Judge: Marino Amador-Leal appeals his conviction and sentence pursuant to a guilty plea on one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The magistrate judge did not explain the potential immigration consequences of Amador-Leal’s conviction when the plea was taken. The question presented here is whether immigra

59 F.3d 1246 U.S.v.Marino* NO. 94-4537 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. June 20, 1995 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla., No. 92-08026-CR-NCR 2

835 F.Supp. 1501 (1993) UNITED STATES of America v. Louis MARINO. No. 90CR87. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D. July 28, 1993. *1502 *1503 *1504 Mitchell Mars, David Buvinger, Asst. U.S. Attys., Chicago, IL, for plaintiff. George N. L

930 F.2d 909 U.S.v.Marino NO. 90-1189 United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. FEB 20, 1991 1 Appeal From: W.D.N.Y. 2 AFFIRMED.

961 F.2d 1581 U.S.v.Marino*** NO. 91-3381 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Apr 22, 1992 1 Appeal From: M.D.Fla.