⚖ 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. Villa-Leon”

Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · 2015-02-23 · Published · cited 0×
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-14-00271-CV VILLA DE LEON CONDOMINIUMS, APPELLANTS LLC, PATTEN SALES AND MARKETING, LLC, AND BILL BRIDGES, JR. V. MICHAEL STEWART AND CARRIE APPELLEES STEWART ----------
Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) · 2015-02-23 · Published · cited 0×
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-14-00271-CV VILLA DE LEON CONDOMINIUMS, APPELLANTS LLC, PATTEN SALES AND MARKETING, LLC, AND BILL BRIDGES, JR. V. MICHAEL STEWART AND CARRIE APPELLEES STEWART -------
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004-03-26 · Published · cited 0× · 97 F. App'x 305
ORDER Upon consideration of Kevin A. Barnes, et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss their appeal, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003-03-06 · Published · cited 0× · 61 F. App'x 690
LINN, Circuit Judge. ORDER Kevin Barnes et al. (Barnes) notify the court that the United States Court of Federal Claims has requested that this court dismiss “the entire matter on appeal, without prejudice, and remand to this court for the purpose of addressing all outstanding matters.” We treat Barnes’ notification as a motion to remand. The United States has not responded. On
Supreme Court of the United States · 2001-10-01 · Published · cited 0× · 534 U.S. 939; 13 F. App'x 541; 122 S. Ct. 314
*939(Reported below: 10 Fed. Appx. 608); *940(13 Fed. Appx. 541); (20 Fed. Appx. 609); C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2024-05-17 · Published · cited 8× · 102 F.4th 508
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1545 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. RICARDO A. VILLA-GUILLEN, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Francisco A. Besosa, U.S. District Judge]
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995-04-20 · Published · cited 1× · 53 F.3d 893
JOHN R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge. Carlos Jose Polanco pleaded guilty to distributing 49.4 grams of cocaine base (“crack cocaine”) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1988). His half-brother, Jose Alfredo Polan-eo-Campagna, pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting this distribution in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1988). The district court sentenced Carlos to the minimum mandatory sentence of 60 mont
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2020-03-11 · Published · cited 0×
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition. Before TANG, LAWRENCE, and STEPHENS, Appellate Military Judges _________________________ UNITED STATES Appellant v. Jerry R. WHITE Aviation Electrician’s Mate First Class (E-6), U.S. Navy
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018-11-28 · Published · cited 0× · 351 F. Supp. 3d 106
BERYL A. HOWELL, Chief Judge Nearly 25 years ago, Navarro Hammond was sentenced to 380 months' imprisonment for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base (or "crack") and marijuana, and for maintaining a premise for the distribution of a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841
District Court, D. Kansas · 2018-09-17 · Published · cited 0× · 337 F. Supp. 3d 1107
JOHN W. BROOMES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This case comes before the court on Defendant's motion to suppress and motion to dismiss count 4. (Docs. 28, 30.) The motions have been fully briefed and the court held an evidentiary hearing on August 21, 2018. (Docs. 29, 31, 32, 33.) Defendant's motion to suppress is DENIED and Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED for the reasons herein. I. Facts
District Court, District of Columbia · 2018-11-28 · Published · cited 0×
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Criminal Action No. 92-471 (BAH) NAVARRO A. HAMMOND, Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Nearly 25 years ago, Navarro
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023-02-06 · Published · cited 2× · 59 F.4th 232
RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 23a0020p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plain
District Court, D. New Jersey · 2018-01-24 · Published · cited 7× · 291 F. Supp. 3d 606
Defendants contend that Ganim 's reliance on the distinction between gratuities and bribery cases is a misreading of Sun-Diamond. They argue that McDonnell clarified this misreading by adopting Sun-Diamond's interpretation of "official act," thereby incorporating its requirements wholesale in all cases brought under section 201. ECF NO. 177-1, at 5; see McDonnell ,
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017-08-16 · Published · cited 1× · 694 F. App'x 422
ORDER Richard Geasland pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B), and was ordered to serve a prison term of 120 months. Geasland appeals the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized in the search of his apartment as well as the district court’s determination that a prior Wisconsin conviction for sexual assault of a minor qualifies as a conviction under a state law relating to abusi
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016-05-02 · Published · cited 12× · 821 F.3d 1226; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 7880; 2016 WL 1730645
SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge. Following the execution of a search warrant, Florentino Villanueva, Jr., was *1229 charged with one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court denied his ;motion. to suppress the firearm seized during the sea
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992-01-21 · Published · cited 2× · 954 F.2d 562; 1992 WL 6512
SKOPIL, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal by the government from the district court’s conditional order excluding the testimony of government witnesses in a criminal prosecution. The district court ruled that the testimony would be excluded unless (1) the government reviewed the personnel files of federal and state law enforcement witnesses for potential impeachment material; and (2) agency counsel and department heads particip
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018-08-16 · Published · cited 11× · 901 F.3d 278
EDITH H. JONES, Circuit Judge: David Anderton was convicted of making a false statement in an immigration document in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546 (a) (Count 1); conspiracy to encourage and induce an illegal alien to reside in the United States in violation
District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2016-02-12 · Published · cited 0× · 161 F. Supp. 3d 1081; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17933; 2016 WL 591770
*1083OPINION AND ORDER JOHN E. DOWDELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. Background Defendant, Elton John Fernandes, is charged with knowingly and intentionally possessing, with intent to distribute, ABFUBINACA (Count One) and XLR11 (Count Two), both of which are listed as Schedule I controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S
District Court, D. Connecticut · 2016-06-10 · Published · cited 6× · 191 F. Supp. 3d 178; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75752; 2016 WL 3248174
RULING RE: PETITIONER’S SUCCESSIVE MOTION TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE (DOC. NO. 1) Janet C. Hall, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Richard Villanueva (“Villanueva”) moves to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under section 2255 of title 28 of the United States Code (“section 2255”). Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (“Motion”) (Doc. No. 1). V
District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2014-04-29 · Published · cited 3× · 16 F. Supp. 3d 848; 2014 WL 1689044; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59059
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO PRECLUDE THE GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSED EXPERTS (Dkts. 211 and 263) MARK A. GOLDSMITH, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ motions to exclude the Government’s proposed experts (Dkts. 211 and 263). Defendants challenge two proposed expert witnesses disclosed by the