Cases

SUMMARY ORDER Co-defendants-appellants Manuel Geral-do, Hargelis Vargas, and Jugo Cespedes (collectively, “defendants”) appeal from sentences and final judgments of conviction entered on October 30, 2015, November 25, 2015, and December 3, 2015, respectively, each by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Engelmayer, J.). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history,

PER CURIAM: Jhonathan Tejas appeals his 366-day sentence of imprisonment for theft of mail, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred in applying a few enhancements under the Sentencing Guidelines and in refusing to give him a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. We agree with Tejas that the enhancement for the number of victim

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

MEMORANDUM ** Tomas Daniel Ramirez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 96-month sentence imposed for illegal reentry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), fraud/false statements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), (a)(3), aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(l), and perjury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

MEMORANDUM ** Tomas Daniel Ramirez appeals from his guilty-plea conviction and 96-month sentence imposed for illegal reentry of a deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), fraud/false statements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), (a)(3), aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(l), and perjury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

LUCERO, Circuit Judge. Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach sought, on behalf of their respective states, that the Election Assistance Commission (“EAC”). add language requiring documentary proof of citizenship to each *1188 state’s instructions on the

473 F.Supp.2d 1185 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, v. Jose Miguel BATTLE, Jr., et. al., Defendants. No. 04 20159 CR GOLD, 04 20159 CR BANDSTRA. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. June 16, 2006. *1186 *1187 *1188 *1189

SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of said district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED. Defendant-appellant Tomas Louis appeals from his conviction by a jury in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Kimba M. Wood, Judge) of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute

DYK, Circuit Judge. ORDER The parties jointly respond to our order directing them to file a status report concerning how these appeals should proceed in view of this court’s decisions in O’Connor v. United States, 308 F.3d 1233 (Fed. Cir.2002) and Mudge v. United States, 308 F.3d 1220 (Fed.Cir.2002). The court previously granted the motion of Fernando Blanco et

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 17-668L (Filed: April 10, 2020) *************************************** GEORGE ANDERSON et al., * * RCFC 56; Cross-Motions for Summary Plaintiffs, * Judgment on Liability; Fifth Amendment * Taking Cla

ORDER PIERAS, District Judge. The Court has before it defendant’s request that Dr. Agustín Garcia, a clinical psychologist be qualified as an expert in this case pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, in order to testify about the effects of drug use on the memory of a number of government witnesses. Federal courts which have accepted the testimony of expert witnesses regarding the effect of drugs upon

ORDER PIERAS, District Judge. The Court has before it an allegation of juror misconduct. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 24(c) provides that: “alternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become or are found to be unable or disqualified to perform their duties.” It is well settled law that “it is within t

DENNIS JACOBS, Circuit Judge: The United States petitions for rehearing following our decision in United States v. Taylor, 736 F.3d 661 (2d Cir.2013). The petition is granted, and the opinion filed December 4, 2013 is withdrawn. For the reasons that follow in our revised opinion, we vacate the convictions of the three defendants and remand for a new trial.

DENNIS JACOBS, Circuit Judge: Curtis Taylor, Antonio Rosario, and Samuel Vasquez appeal judgments of conviction entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Marrero, J.) for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence, among other offenses related to the robbery of a pharmac

Judge STRAUB dissents in part and concurs in part in a separate opinion. *592KATZMANN, Circuit Judge: Defendants-Appellants Antonio and Herman Quinones appeal from judgments of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Block, /.), entered on October 15 and November 23, 2009, following a jury trial, convicting Herman Quinones

639 F.Supp.2d 98 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, v. Homes VALENCIA-RIOS, Defendant. Criminal Action No. 99-389-02 (RWR). United States District Court, District of Columbia. August 5, 2009. *101 Carl Eurenius, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RI

PER CURIAM: Defendants-Appellants Juan Victor Valles, Johnny Garcia-Esparza, Sammy Garcia, and Jimmy Zavala were indicted for numerous illegal acts stemming from their involvement in the Texas Mexican Mafia (“TMM”). After a lengthy trial, a jury returned guilty verdicts against each defendant on each count of their respective indictments. The district court sentenced the defenda

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA __________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) Criminal Action No. 99-389-02 (RWR) ) HOMES VALENCIA-RIOS, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The court of appeals rem

OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge. Before the court are Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Failure to State a Claim (“motion”) and Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on Partial Liability (“cross-motion”). In this action, plaintiffs Love Terminal Partners, L.P. and Virginia Aerospace, LLC (“Love Terminal Partners” and “Virginia Aerospace,” respectively; “plaintiffs

PER CURIAM: In this case, the Government is appealing from the granting of a Motion for Acquittal following a jury verdict finding the defendant herein guilty of obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503. We reverse. The appellee, the defendant in the court below, Tomas L. Varkonyi, was indicted on four co