Cases

Appellate Case: 23-5027 Document: 010111083311 Date Filed: 07/23/2024 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS July 23, 2024

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendant Charles Jason Wood’s Motion to Suppress. (Doc. #26.) The Court held a half-day evidentiary hearing on the Motion on Februaxy 23, 2017. For the reasons described herein, Defendant’s Motion to Suppress is granted. I. BACKGROUND

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jermaine Lamont Wood appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the distric

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Morgan Clifford Wood 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). Wood has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record r

*407Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wendell Wood appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider its 2009 denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 8582(c)(2) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingl

587 F.3d 882 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jason Paul WOOD, Appellant. No. 08-3998. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: October 21, 2009. Filed: November 23, 2009. *883 Rick L. Ramstad, Sioux Falls, SD, for appellant. Marty J. Jackley, AUSA, Sioux Falls, SD, for appel

*724Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wendell Wood appeals the district court’s orders summarily denying his motion to reopen the appeal period and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, w

*724Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wendell Wood appeals the district court’s orders summarily denying his motion to reopen the appeal period and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, w

MEMORANDUM ** Ryan Mitchell Wood appeals from the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for possession of an unregistered firearm in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Wood contends that the district court abused its discretion by applying an upward adjustment based on uncharged conduct. This conte

OPINION OF THE COURT THOMPSON, District Judge. Gary Wood (“Wood”) appeals the sentence imposed by the District Court in August 2006, following his guilty plea for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). His appeal challenges the computation of his criminal history score based on the “relatedness” of certain of his prior convictions. For the reasons below, we will affirm the sentence imposed by the

MEMORANDUM ** Gregg V. Wood appeals his conviction for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, his sentence of 21 months of imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and an order to pay restitution. Because we hold that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for wire fraud, we reverse Wood’s conviction. I. Background The parties are familiar with

Opinions of the United 2008 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-1-2008 USA v. Wood Precedential or Non-Precedential: P

Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-22-2007 USA v. Wood Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-17-2007 USA v. Wood Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Opinions of the United 2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-22-2007 USA v. Wood Precedential or Non-Precedential:

459 F.Supp.2d 451 (2006) UNITED STATES of America v. John Alvester WOOD. Criminal No. 3:05cr477. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. September 29, 2006. *452 *453 Stephen David Schiller, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Richmond, VA, United States of America. Car

PER CURIAM. The district court violated the Sixth Amendment by applying a mandatory version of the federal sentencing guidelines, which required it to enhance the defendant’s sentence beyond the statutory maximum based on facts not admitted to by him nor found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 756, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). The defendant raised and preserved the

MEMORANDUM ** Charles Joseph Wood appeals his 37-month sentence following a guilty-plea to assault with a dangerous weapon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153(a) and 113(a)(3). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We remand the sentence for further proceedings consistent with United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084-85 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

BALDOCK, Circuit Judge. The question presented in this appeal is whether the United States Sentencing Guidelines or generally-applicable state sentencing laws apply when a defendant is convicted under the Indian Major Crimes Act (IMCA) where state law defines the elements of the crime and range of punishment. The IMCA, 18 U.S.C. § 1153, provides in relevant part:

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 2 United States v. Wood, et al. No. 01-2548 ELECTRONIC CITATION: 2004 FED App. 0111P (6th Cir.) File Name: 04a0111p.06 _________________ COUNSEL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS