Cases

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Nicolas Almanza Rosas 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). Al-manza Rosas has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jose Rosas-Guillen appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction based on Amendment 782 to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Marumi. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordin

MEMORANDUM ** Jose Rosas-Uzagarra appeals his conviction by guilty plea and 51-month sentence for attempted 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), Rosas-Uzagarra’s attorney has filed a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No

MEMORANDUM OPINION R. DAVID PROCTOR, District Judge. In United States v. Jones, the Supreme Court held that attachment of a global positioning system (“GPS”) tracking device to a vehicle, and subsequent use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movement on public streets, was a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 945, 181 L.Ed.2d 911 (2012). In ligh

PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Angel Rosas, Jr., 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). Rosas has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no non-frivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s m

ORDER The Opinion filed July 27, 2010, is amended as follows: 1. On slip Opinion page 10811, line 4-5, please replace with <we now must determine whether the district court’s finding that Rosas was not a minor partic

615 F.3d 1058 (2010) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel ROSAS, Defendant-Appellant. *1059 United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Miguel Angel Rosas, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 09-10011, 09-10013. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted December 10, 2009.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER THOMAS D. SCHROEDER, District Judge. Before the court is the motion to suppress filed by Defendant Teodoro RosasHerrera (“Rosas-Herrera”), who is charged here in a single-count indictment for illegal reentry of a removed alien in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2). Rosas-Herrera contends that his arrest was unlawful and seeks to suppress all information law enforcement

MEMORANDUM ** Manuel Rosas appeals from the 63-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to being an alien in the United *288States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Rosas contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) should be construed to require t

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Fernando Rosas-Lopez 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). Rosas-Lopez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Rosas-Lopez’s claim of ineffective assistance

PER CURIAM: * Manuel Rosas-Hernandez (Rosas) appeals the 71-month prison sentence imposed by the district court after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that the sentence is greater than necessary to meet the sentencing goals outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and specifically asserts (1) that U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, the guidelines provision applicable to violation

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Ismael Rosas-Fortis raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres 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. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007),

526 F.3d 829 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oscar Adahir ROSAS-PULIDO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 06-41223. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. May 1, 2008. *830 Paula Camille Offenhauser, James Lee Turner, Asst. U.S. Attys., Tony Ray Roberts (argued), Houston, TX, for U.S. Marjorie A. Mey

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Oscar Adahir Rosas-Pulido (Rosas) 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). Rosas has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the

ORDER Jesse Rosas pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana, 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and the district court sentenced him to 136 months’ imprisonment, 3 years’ supervised release, and a $100 special assessment. Rosas filed a notice of appeal, but his appointed lawyer now moves to withdraw because he believes that all grounds for appeal would be frivolous. See Anders

MEMORANDUM ** Juan Rosas-Calderon appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 41-month sentence imposed for illegal re-entry into the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Rosas-Calderon has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, and a

PER CURIAM: * Fernando Rosas-Diaz (Rosas) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry following deportation. Rosas contends that his sentence is invalid in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because the sentencing judge applied the sentencing guidelines as if they were mandatory. Because Rosas did not raise this issu

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 04-2929 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FREDDY ROSAS, Defendant-Appellant. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 04-2929 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FREDDY ROSAS, Defendant-Appellant. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

MEMORANDUM ** Santiago Rosas-Arteaga challenges his sentence, claiming that the district court *502failed to consider the relative culpability of his co-defendants. The record belies that claim. Rosas-Arteaga and co-defendant, Manual Chavez, were both sentenced to the five-year minimum for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (carrying a firearm during and