Cases

MEMORANDUM*** Because Sanchez-Ochoa’s waiver of his right to appeal was voluntarily, knowingly, and properly entered, it did not violate his right to due process. See, e.g., United States v. Navarro-Botello, 912 F.2d 318, 321-22 (9th Cir.1990). Similarly, because *145the government fully complied with its obligations under the terms of the

Case: 19-11181 Document: 00515588425 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/02/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 2, 2020

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

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

EMILY C. MARKS, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE On October 19, 2018, the Court entered an order denying the government's appeal of the Magistrate Judge's order of release of the defendant (doc. 18) filed on September 14, 2018. In that order, the Court *1020indicated that a memorandum opinion detailing the denial of the appeal was forthcom

FLETCHER, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I dissent because the majority lose sight of the general rule that post-arrest silence may not be used against a defendant and improperly seek to bring the facts of this case within the limited exception to that rule set forth in Anderson v. Charles, 447 U.S. 404, 100 S.Ct. 2180, 65 L.Ed.2d 222 (1980). The Supreme Court, in Doyle v. Ohio,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 22-50072 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:20-cr-00083- v. RGK-1 ELIEL NUNEZ SANCHEZ, AKA Eliel Nunez, OPINION Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central Di

REAVLEY, Circuit Judge: Four defendants convicted of distribution and conspiracy to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 bring *200 this appeal to urge various grounds of complaint: improper use of informants, multiple rathe

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3568 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jeremias Sanchez-Velasco Defendant - Ap

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1431 JUAN JOSE ESPINOZA-OCHOA, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS Before Gelpí, Howard, and Rik

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 19-1311 ____________ JOSE SANTOS SANCHEZ; SONIA GONZALEZ v. SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES NEBRA

MEMORANDUM ** Jesus Puga-Ochoa appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment charging him with a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment. Puga-Ochoa contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment because his prior deportation wa

MEMORANDUM ** Jesus Puga-Ochoa appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment charging him with a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm, but remand to correct the judgment. Puga-Ochoa contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment because his prior deportation wa

MEMORANDUM ** Alejandra Ochoa-Navarette appeals from the sentence imposed following her guilty plea for unlawful reentry by a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm and remand. Ochoa-Navarette first contends that the district court erred in enhancing her sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) based on non-jury fact-finding

Case: 19-60519 Document: 00515941651 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/16/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED

Opinion SIMONS, J. Defendant Jose Antonio Ochoa (defendant) appeals from the judgment following his conviction for various offenses, including threatening public officers. We affirmed the judgment in an opinion filed March 25, 2015, and the California Supreme Court granted review and deferred further action

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR., United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Antonio Sanchez Ochoa is currently in Yakima County Department of Corrections’ (DOC) custody on state criminal charges. He alleges that he is unable to post bail on his state criminal charges because Defendants Director Ed Campbell, Chief S

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

EDENFIELD, District Judge: This opinion consolidates and decides the appeals . of Fabio Ochoa-Vasquez (“Ochoa”) in United States v. Ochoa-Vasquez, Case Number 03-14400, in which Ochoa is a criminal defendant, and United States v. Bergonzoli, Case Number 04-10718, in which Ochoa is an intervenor. In Ochoa-Vasquez, Ochoa appeals his conviction and sentence for drug trafficking violations, two order

BRUNETTI, Circuit Judge. Appellant Jorge Ochoa pleaded guilty to a one count information charging him with distribution of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). In the plea agreement, Ochoa admitted to knowingly possessing and delivering to a co-conspirator three kilograms of cocaine. Ochoa filed an objection to the Guideline Presentence Report and Recommendation (her