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 Nava”
Mendoza v. Barnhartpublic domain
*1193ante, p. 855; ante, p. 1035; ante, p. 1005; ante, p. 1023; ante, p. 1027; ante, p. 994; ante, p. 1048; ante, p. 1068; ante, p. 1072; ante, p. 1049; <
United States v. Rolando Mendoza-Velasquezpublic domain
PER CURIAM: This appeal arises from a district court’s judgment requiring Rolando Mendoza-Velasquez to “participate in a mental health program” and “incur costs associated with such program, based on ability to pay” as a special condition of supervised release. The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court committed reversible plain error by imposing this requirement. B
United States v. Nava-Garciapublic domain
PER CURIAM: * Victor Nava-Garcia has filed an unopposed motion to summarily affirm his conviction and summarily vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing in light of Lopez v. Gonzales, — U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 625, 166 L.Ed.2d 462 (2006), and United States v. Estrada-Mendoza, 475 F.3d 258 (5th Cir.2007). The motion is GRANTED, the conviction is AFFIRMED, the sentence is VACATED,
United States v. Mendozapublic domain
543 F.3d 1186 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jesus MENDOZA, also known as Silva, Defendant-Appellee. No. 07-3181. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. October 1, 2008. *1188 Brent I. Anderson, Assistant United States Attorney, Wichita, Kansas, for the Plaintiff-Appellant. E. Jay Greeno,
United States v. Cervantes-Navapublic domain
REVISED FEBRUARY 26, 2002 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________ No. 01-50200 _______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Commonwealth v. Navapublic domain
966 A.2d 630 (2009) COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Ulises Luna NAVA, Appellant. No. 334 EDA 2008. Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Submitted November 17, 2008. Filed February 11, 2009. *631 Amparito Arriaga, Exton, for appellant. Nicholas J. Casenta, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., West Chester, for Com.
Manuel Mendoza Jr. v. the State of Texaspublic domain
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-22-00276-CR ___________________________ MANUEL MENDOZA JR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 78th District Court Wichita County, Texas Trial Court No. 60,068-B-1 Before Kerr, Bassel, and Womack, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Kerr MEMORANDU
Mendoza-Pablo v. Holderpublic domain
Opinion by Judge RAKOFF; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge RAWLINSON. OPINION RAKOFF, Senior District Judge: Petitioner Juan Ubaldo Mendoza-Pablo petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) on the ground, inter a
United States v. Roberto Cervantes-Nava, A/K/A Roberto Nava Cervantes, A/K/A Roberto Cervantes-Novapublic domain
JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: The district court found Roberto Cervantes-Nava guilty of illegally re-entering the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 and imposed an increase of sixteen in his base offense level for a driving while intoxicated (“DWI”) conviction. Because, in this criminal case, the federal courts cannot alter the derivative citizenship requirements of
Aguilar-Soto v. United Statespublic domain
*1211(Reported below: 79 Fed. Appx. 70); (79 Fed. Appx. 69); (79 Fed. Appx. 18); (79 Fed. Appx. 17); (79 Fed. Appx. 75); (78 Fed. Appx. 425); (79 Fed. Appx. 40); (79 Fed. Appx. 35); *1212(79 Fed. Appx. 37);
Aguilar-Soto v. United Statespublic domain
*1211(Reported below: 79 Fed. Appx. 70); (79 Fed. Appx. 69); (79 Fed. Appx. 18); (79 Fed. Appx. 17); (79 Fed. Appx. 75); (78 Fed. Appx. 425); (79 Fed. Appx. 40); (79 Fed. Appx. 35); *1212(79 Fed. Appx. 37);
United States v. Bourragepublic domain
Case: 23-60286 Document: 181-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/21/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit FILED No. 23-60286 May 21, 2025 ____________
United States v. Vidal-Cruzpublic domain
67 F.Supp.2d 35 (1999) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Allyson VIDAL-CRUZ, et al., Defendants. Nos. 98-277(CCC), 98-279(HL), 98-280(DRD), 98-282(DRD), 98-283(PG), 98-284(SEC), 98-285(PG), 98-287(CCC), 98-289(DRD), 98-290(DRD), 98-291(HL), 98-292(CCC), 98-297(CCC). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. September 1, 1999.
United States v. Perez-Greauxpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1699 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. LUIS O. PÉREZ-GREAUX, T/N LUIS ORLANDO PÉREZ-GREAX, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Francisco A. Besosa, U.S. District Judge]
United States v. Perraultpublic domain
FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 21, 2021 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR TH
United States v. Gomez-Arzatepublic domain
FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 2, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE T
United States v. Edgar Mejiapublic domain
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 24-3380 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Edgar A. Mejia Defendant - Ap
Darnell Mason v. United Statespublic domain
McLeese, Associate Judge: Appellant Darnell Mason challenges his convictions for tampering with evidence, destruction of property, obstruction of justice, and unlawful entry. We hold that the trial court committed reversible error by disqualifying a potential juror. We therefore reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings. We also
United States v. William Kiekowpublic domain
*241 CARL E. STEWART, Chief Judge: After a 14-day jury trial, a jury in the Eastern District of Texas convicted Defendants-Appellants William Edmund Kiekow (“Kiekow”), Felipe U. Uriarte (“Uriarte”), and Arthur James Pierre (“Pierre”) (collectively, “Appellants”) of conspiracy to distribute or possess with
United States v. Cooperpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER MARTHA VÁZQUEZ, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Wanda Kay Cooper’s Motion to Suppress Evidence [Doc. 14]. The government filed a Response [Doc. 17], Cooper filed a Reply [Doc. 22], and the Court held an extended hearing on the Motion on December 2, 2014 [Doc. 36]. The Court, having considered the Motion, briefs, hearing testimony, exh