⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

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. Santoya”

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2007-06-25 · Published · cited 4× · 493 F. Supp. 2d 1075; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46332; 2007 WL 1830730
493 F.Supp.2d 1075 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Peter SANTOYA, Defendant. No. 06-CR-82. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. June 25, 2007. Daniel H. Sanders, United States Department of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. Kirk B. Obear, Law Offices of Barry S. Cohen, Elkhart Lake, WI, for Defendant.<
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009-08-18 · Published · cited 0× · 331 F. App'x 326
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Ivan Santoya-Delgado 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. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.200
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009-08-18 · Published · cited 0× · 331 F. App'x 326
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Jose Ivan Santoya-Delgado 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. United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.200
District Court, E.D. California · 2018-07-04 · Published · cited 1× · 314 F. Supp. 3d 1077
JOHN A. MENDEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *1085I. INTRODUCTION Before this Court is the United States of America's ("Plaintiff" or "United States") Motion for a Preliminary Injunction ("Motion"). Plaintiff seeks an Order from this Court enjoining enforcement of certain provisions of three laws enacted by the State of Cali
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2009-10-13 · Published · cited 1× · 667 F. Supp. 2d 993; 2009 WL 3270085
667 F.Supp.2d 993 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Lervon CAMPBELL, Defendant. Case No. 09-CR-78. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. October 9, 2009. As Corrected October 13, 2009. *995 John J. Manning, United States Department of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for P
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2008-10-29 · Published · cited 0× · 586 F. Supp. 2d 1065; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91406; 2008 WL 4830077
586 F.Supp.2d 1065 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Eddie TAYLOR, Defendant. Case No. 07-CR-322. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. October 29, 2008. *1066 Gregory J. Haanstad, United States Department of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. Brian P. Mullins, Federal
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968-08-09 · Published · cited 32× · 401 F.2d 35; 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5831
401 F.2d 35 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Salvatore GUAJARDO-MELENDEZ, also known as Guadalupe Santoya, Defendant-Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Mario Moises ALMAREZ-MEDINA, also known as Mario Moises Almarez, also known as Ramon Tjerina, also known as Guillermo Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant. No. 16335. No. 16336.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2008-03-07 · Published · cited 1× · 537 F. Supp. 2d 990; 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19855; 2008 WL 644885
537 F.Supp.2d 990 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Marcello JACKSON, Defendant. No. 07-CR-242. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. March 7, 2008. Daniel H. Sanders, United States Department of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff. *991 SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2007-08-14 · Published · cited 1× · 502 F. Supp. 2d 712; 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60968; 2007 WL 2317772
502 F.Supp.2d 712 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Jimmy ORTIZ, aka Javier Lopez-Diaz, aka Flaco, Defendant. No. 1:06-CR-417-004. United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. August 14, 2007. Ronald B. Bakeman, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Northern District of Ohio, Cleveland, OH, for Plaintiff. Albert A. Giuliani, Cleveland, OH, f
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968-08-09 · Published · cited 2× · 401 F.2d 35
SWYGERT, Circuit Judge. No. 16335 Salvatore Guajardo-Melendez, also known as Guadalupe Santoya, appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of selling heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 174. The indictment, containing one count, additionally named Jose Beeera-Soto and Mario Moisés Almarez-Medina, also known as Guillermo Hernandez. After the jury had been selected but before the i
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984-09-26 · Published · cited 51× · 743 F.2d 1465; 16 Fed. R. Serv. 782; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 18250
PER CURIAM: In June 1980, Francisco Santoya, Ricardo Esle, Luis Arango, and Roberto Diaz-Gomez arranged to sell undercover Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents approximately ten kilograms of cocaine. The agents arrested Santoya, Esle, and Arango at the delivery point; they arrested Diaz at his home shortly thereafter. The arrestees were indicted and charged, in two co
State v. Juarezpublic domain
Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2013-10-02 · Published · cited 0× · 837 N.W.2d 473; 2013 WL 5460938; 2013 Minn. LEXIS 403
OPINION DIETZEN, Justice. The principal issue in this case is whether Minn.Stat. § 609.3455 (2012), as applied to appellant Jose Santoya Juarez, imposes “cruel and unusual” punishment in violation of the federal constitution, or “cruel or unusual” punishment in violation of the state constitution. A grand jury indicted Juarez for attempted first-degree criminal sexual conduct, second-degree criminal sexua
California Court of Appeal · 2024-05-30 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 5/30/24 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, D082865 Petitioner, (Riverside Super. Ct. No. INF2100736) v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, Respondent; DIANA CONTRERAS CHAGOL
California Court of Appeal · 2020-01-10 · Published · cited 0×
Filed 1/10/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, Plaintiff and Respondent, G057013 v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2018-00984280) XAVIER BECERRA, as Attorney General, OPI
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2002-03-01 · Published · cited 0×
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 01-2032 ___________ Edwin Atilio Vasquez-Velezmoro, * * Petitioner, * * On Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Boa
Supreme Court of Missouri · 2001-10-23 · Published · cited 69× · 57 S.W.3d 855; 2001 WL 1285693
RONNIE L. WHITE, Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. The principal opinion concludes that for purposes of venue a suit is “brought” both when an original petition is filed and “re-brought” anytime an additional defendant is added by amendment. The principal opinion sanctions this fluid concept of when a suit is “brought” to achieve its desired end of limiting the forum selection capacity granted to the
District Court, E.D. California · 2017-09-26 · Published · cited 11× · 277 F. Supp. 3d 1127
ORDER Kimberly J. Mueller, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE An online vehicle auction company hired a software development company to design and build its new online system, but when the project did not go as planned the auction company terminated the contract and the parties sued each other. The auction company, plaintiff Copart, Inc. (“Co-part”), moves
Tomas v. Gillespiepublic domain
District Court, S.D. New York · 2005-01-05 · Published · cited 8× · 385 F. Supp. 2d 240; 73 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1417; 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76
385 F.Supp.2d 240 (2005) Jean Bryson TOMAS, Plaintiff, v. Lorraine GILLESPIE and Dizlo Music Corporation, Defendants. No. 00 Civ. 0046(GBD). United States District Court, S.D. New York. January 5, 2005. *241 Peter Herbert, Lankler Siffert & Wohl LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiff. Robert L. Greene, Law Office of Robert L
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008-07-28 · Published · cited 7× · 534 F.3d 1320; 2008 WL 2880345
534 F.3d 1320 (2008) Adelina GARCIA; Antonio Garcia; Jeronimo Vargas-Vera; Efrain Aguilar; Paulina Aguilar; Adelaida Aguirre; Jose R. Aguirre; Salvador Almanza; Miguel Amaya; Rogelio Andrade; Jesus Anguiano; Efigenia Arana; Jose R. Arana; Ramon Arana; Alma Armendariz; Jorge L. Banda Valadez; Delfino Barragan; Lucia Barragan; Ramon P. Barragan; Holga Benitez; Baltazar Bonilla; Maria Guadalupe Bonilla; Catalina Bustillos; Bernardo Calderon; Etelvina Calder
Ware v. Millerpublic domain
Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo) · 2002-09-05 · Published · cited 57× · 82 S.W.3d 795; 2002 WL 1827664
82 S.W.3d 795 (2002) Arthur WARE, Individually and as Potter County Judge, John Stradley, Individually and as Potter County Commissioner, Manny Perez-Villasenor, Individually and as Potter County Commissioner, Strickland Watkins, Individually and as Potter County Commissioner, Iris Sanders Lawrence, Individually and as Potter County Commissioner and Potter County, Texas, Appellants, v. Terry MILLER, Potter County Constable, Precinct 2, Appellee.<