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. Ochoa-Mendoza”
Gonzales v. United Statespublic domain
540 U.S. 917 GONZALESv.UNITED STATES.RODRIGUEZ-LUISv.UNITED STATES.RIASCOSv.UNITED STATES.HINOJOSAv.UNITED STATES.OROZCOv.UNITED STATES.PARDO-RODRIGUEZv.UNITED STATES.GONZALEZ ABAZANv.UNITED STATES.YANEZ-BENAVIDES, AKA RAMIREZ-MONTOYAv.UNITED STATES.NAJERA-GUERRAv.UNITED STATES.DIEGUEZ-GARCIAv.UNITED STATES.HERNANDEZv.UNIT
Gonzales v. United Statespublic domain
(Reported below: 66 Fed. Appx. 526); (67 Fed. Appx. 243); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 247); (67 Fed. Appx. 253); (67 Fed. Appx. 244); (73 Fed. Appx. 79); (67 Fed. Appx. 244); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 246); (67 Fed. Appx. 246);
Gonzales v. United Statespublic domain
(Reported below: 66 Fed. Appx. 526); (67 Fed. Appx. 243); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 247); (67 Fed. Appx. 253); (67 Fed. Appx. 244); (73 Fed. Appx. 79); (67 Fed. Appx. 244); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 245); (67 Fed. Appx. 246); (67 Fed. Appx. 246);
Barnes v. United Statespublic domain
ORDER Upon consideration of Kevin A. Barnes, et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss their appeal, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
Acosta-Flores v. United Statespublic domain
(Reported below: 95 Fed. Appx. 591); (95 Fed. Appx. 572); (95 Fed. Appx. 677); (95 Fed. Appx. 686); (95 Fed. Appx. 694); (95 Fed. Appx. 576); (95 Fed. Appx. 691); (95 Fed. Appx. 668); (95 Fed. Appx. 693); (95 Fed. Appx. 567); (95 Fed. Appx. 672); (95 Fed. Appx. 616);
Barnes v. United Statespublic domain
LINN, Circuit Judge. ORDER Kevin Barnes et al. (Barnes) notify the court that the United States Court of Federal Claims has requested that this court dismiss “the entire matter on appeal, without prejudice, and remand to this court for the purpose of addressing all outstanding matters.” We treat Barnes’ notification as a motion to remand. The United States has not responded. On
Salinas-Romo v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Salinas-Romo v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Martinez-Mata v. United Statespublic domain
(Reported below: 78 Fed. Appx. 435); (79 Fed. Appx. 59); (79 Fed. Appx. 634); (78 Fed. Appx. 405); (78 Fed. Appx. 410); (78 Fed. Appx. 411); (79 Fed. Appx. 627); (78 Fed. Appx. 411); (78 Fed. Appx. 412); (79 Fed. Appx. 630); (78 Fed. Appx. 413); (78 Fed. Appx. 414);
Martinez-Mata v. United Statespublic domain
(Reported below: 78 Fed. Appx. 435); (79 Fed. Appx. 59); (79 Fed. Appx. 634); (78 Fed. Appx. 405); (78 Fed. Appx. 410); (78 Fed. Appx. 411); (79 Fed. Appx. 627); (78 Fed. Appx. 411); (78 Fed. Appx. 412); (79 Fed. Appx. 630); (78 Fed. Appx. 413); (78 Fed. Appx. 414);
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 ____________
Barajas-Aguilar v. United Statespublic domain
*939(Reported below: 10 Fed. Appx. 608); *940(13 Fed. Appx. 541); (20 Fed. Appx. 609); C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
United States v. Ahmed Alahmedalabdaloklahpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10435 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:12-cr-01263- v. ROS-1 AHMED ALAHMEDALABDALOKLAH, AMENDED OPINION *
United States v. Ahmed Alahmedalabdaloklahpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-10435 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:12-cr-01263- v. ROS-1 AHMED ALAHMEDALABDALOKLAH, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
United States v. Rosendo Valdivias-Sotopublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-10415 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 5:18-cr-00505- v. BLF-1 ROSENDO VALDIVIAS-SOTO, OPINION Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from t
United States v. Melchor Orozco-Orozcopublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50146 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 3:21-cr-02349- v. TWR-1 MELCHOR OROZCO-OROZCO, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Distr
United States v. Jose Gambino-Ruizpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Nos. 21-50303 21-50305 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. v. 3:20-cr-03124- LAB-1 JOSE GAMBINO-RUIZ,
United States v. Palomar-Santiagopublic domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2020 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
United States v. Palomar-Santiagopublic domain
6/1/2021 10:22:25 AM Compare Results Old File: New File: 20-437.pdf 20-437_new.pdf versus 10 pages (91 KB) 10 pages (90 KB)
United States v. Praxedis Portillo-Gonzalezpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 21-10260 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:19-cr-01331- v. DJH-1 PRAXEDIS SAUL PORTILLO- GONZALEZ, AKA Alex Ganes- OPINION Diarte, AKA Jose Omar Reyes- Hernan, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United State