Cases

This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition. Before HACKEL, GROSS, and BLOSSER Appellate Military Judges _________________________ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Antoine D. PERRY Aviation Ordnanceman Air

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1730 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. DAMIAN PERRY, a/k/a Primo, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE [Hon. John A. Woodcock, Jr., U.S. District Judge]

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rachel Perry 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). Perry has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions o

FEINERMAN, District Judge. Jason Perry pleaded guilty to two counts under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. The district court sentenced him to 360 months’ imprisonment upon, finding that three of his prior felonies, including two burglary convictions under Indiana law, qualified as “violent felonies” under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Perry argues

UNITED STATES NAVY-MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. Before J.A. FISCHER, K.J. BRUBAKER, B.T. PALMER Appellate Military Judges UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JAMAR X. PERRY MASTER-AT-ARMS (E-5), U.S. NAVY NMCCA 2014

OPINION SIMANDLE, Chief Judge: I. INTRODUCTION This motion to suppress evidence presents 'the question whether this federal court is bound by the decision of a judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey granting the defendant’s motion to suppress a handgun found concealed in his vehicle after a warrantless search on December 22, 2012. The Superior Court found that the warrantless search a

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CASPER, District Judge. I. Introduction The United States has charged John Perry, Joseph Burhoe, James Deamicis. and Thomas Flaherty (“Defendants”) in an indictment alleging a racketeering conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.; extortion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951; mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341; theft of prop

OPINION and ORDER MARK S. DAVIS, District Judge. This criminal matter is before the Court on a motion filed by defendant W. Wayne Perry, Jr. (“Perry” or “Mr. Perry”) seeking a bill of particulars as to Count Fourteen of the superseding indictment, ECF No. 64, and a motion filed by the United States of America (“Government”) seeking to disqualify Perry’s retained counsel based on the alleged need

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ernest Perry appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for substanti

CCA 37676. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to November 25, 2013.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 14‐3010 & 14‐3028 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff‐Appellee, v. PERRY HARRINGTON, Defendant‐Appellant.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ernest Perry appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Unit

CCA 201100273. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 17, 2012.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Davon Perry seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate

CCA 37676. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, we note that before the convening authority took action after remand, Appellant did not have the opportunity to submit matters under Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 1105 and no staff judge advocate’s recommendation was prepared under R.C.M. 1106. Accordingly, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted on the follo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Crim. Action No. 04cr511 (CKK) ANTWON PERRY, Defendant. ORDER This case comes before the Court upon the receipt of a Report and Recommendation dated February 15, 2012, from Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson. No objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have been received by the Court. Accordingly, it is this _£L‘Zl)ay of Febmary, 2012, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation is

CCA 201100645. On consideration of the motion filed by Major Jeffrey R. Liebenguth for leave to withdraw as appellate defense counsel, it appears that the Judge Advocate General has assigned another counsel to represent Appellant and that the new counsel has assumed representation of said Appellant. Accordingly, it is ordered that said motion is hereby granted.

CCA 37676. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to October 24, 2011.

CCA 2010-17. On consideration of the writ-appeal petition and the petition for grant of review of the denial of the petition for new trial pursuant to Article 73, UCMJ, said writ-appeal petition is denied, and the petition for grant of review of the denial of the petition for a new trial pursuant to Article 73, UCMJ, is hereby denied without prejudice to raising the issue in the normal course of appellate review.

FILED Aus -2 2011 C\erk, U.S. District and Bankruptcy COuI'fS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CC)LUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. CR. NO. 05-00203-02 (PLF)(AK) KAREN M. PERRY, Defendant. \/\/\_/\_/\_/§/§/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge by the Honorable Paul L. Friedman for a Hearing on Violation of Defendant’s Supervised Release and a Report and Recommendation. Background On January 20, 2006, the Defendant, K