Cases

667 F.3d 886 (2012) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando NAVARRETE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 10-1543. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued November 2, 2011. Decided January 19, 2012. *887 Manish S. Shah (argued), Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, f

ORDER Sergio Navarrete pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess more than five kilograms of cocaine with intent to distribute, see 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and the district court sentenced him to 151 months’ imprisonment. In his plea agreement he promised to forgo any appeal of his conviction or sentence. Navarrete filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed lawyers move to withdraw because they cannot identify any nonfrivol

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Pedro Navarrete 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). Navarrete has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record refle

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Pedro Navarrete-Castillo 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). Navarrete-Castillo has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions o

*689MEMORANDUM ** Jose Navarrete appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for modification of sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Navarrete contends that Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, retroactively amending U.S.S.G. §

*689MEMORANDUM ** Jose Navarrete appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for modification of sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Navarrete contends that Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, retroactively amending U.S.S.G. §

PER CURIAM: Ryan Thomas Truskoski, appointed counsel for Geovanni Navarrete in Case No. 09-10182, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the

ORDER Sergio Navarrete pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess more than five kilograms of cocaine with intent to distribute, see 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and the district court sentenced him to 151 months’ imprisonment. In his plea agreement he promised to forgo any appeal of his conviction or sentence. Navarrete filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed lawyers move to withdraw because they cannot identify any nonfrivol

PER CURIAM: Ryan Thomas Truskoski, appointed counsel for Geovanni Navarrete in Case No. 09-10182, has filed a motion to withdraw on appeal supported by a brief prepared pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the

ORDER Adolfo Navarrete-Leyva, a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to being present in the United States unlawfully after having been removed, see 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). The district court sentenced him to 51 months’ imprisonment, the bottom of his guidelines range. He filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed lawyer believes that the appeal is frivolous and seeks to withdraw under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744

MEMORANDUM ** Nelson Giovanni Navarrete appeals from his conviction and 45-month sentence imposed for re-entry into the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Navarrete’s attorney has moved to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), on the ground that the appeal presents no arguable issues. Navarrete has not s

554 F.3d 1312 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Enrique NAVARRETE-MEDINA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-2014. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. February 10, 2009. *1313 Submitted on the briefs: Scott M. Davidson, Albuquerque, NM, for Defendant-Appellant. Gregory J. Fouratt, United States At

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Navarrete-Fierro (Navarrete) raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. Navarrete also raises arguments that are foreclosed by United St

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Genaro Navarrete-Zavala raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Pedro Navarrete-Castillo raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense, and by United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 4

MEMORANDUM ** Hilda Navarrete-Landa appeals her guilty plea conviction and sentence for importing marijuana through the Calexico Port of Entry. Her argument challenging the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960 is foreclosed by United States v. Varela-Rivera, 279 F.3d 1174, 1175 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002) and United States v. Mendoza-Paz, 286 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.2002). This court has also r

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-3230 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MIGUEL NAVARRETE, JR., Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-3230 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MIGUEL NAVARRETE, JR., Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.