Cases

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § PATRICIO ALEJANDRO CASTANEDA, No. 08-14-00192-CR § Appellant, Appeal from § v.

TALLMAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting: The alien, a convicted killer who illegally re-entered the United States after his pri- or deportation, has once again been removed after the district court dismissed his 2008 criminal re-entry charge because the 1997 removal order was technically flawed. Congress has by statute strictly limited what process is due to a petitioner who re-enters after a prior deportation. Our c

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 9, 2009 Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 9, 2009. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

18-1120-cv Tobias Bermudez Chavez, et al. v. Occidental Chemical Corp. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2018 (Argued: March 4, 2019 Decided: August 6, 2021) Docket No. 18-1120-cv TOBIAS BERMUDEZ CHAVEZ, GERARDO ANTONIO FONESCA TORRES, FRANKLIN GUILLEN SALAZAR, GARCIA MONTES JOSE GABINO, MARIANO DE LOS ANGELES PIZARRO, ANTONIO OSORN

OPINION WARDLAW, Circuit Judge: Every day along the southwest border, previously deported aliens lacking entry documents are arrested, detained, and charged with illegal reentry. Once convicted, they serve a term of imprisonment, and then are again deported. The numbers are so great that federal prosecutors in these border states began to resort to an ef

Filed 6/21/17 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In re JOSE S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. D070521 THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. J199255) v. JOSE S., Defendant and Appellant. A

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

EDWARD C. PRADO, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a money-launder-ing-eonspiraey trial. The Los Zetas drug cartel entered the U.S. quarter-horse racing business. Los Zetas used their horse-racing operations to launder money. Four Defendants-Appellants involved in the horse-racing operations were convicted of conspiring to launder money in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). The

17-2208, 18-359 Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2018 (Argued: February 13, 2019 Decided: April 1, 2020) Nos. 17-2208-cv, 18-359-cv MAXCIMO SCOTT, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, JAY FRANCIS ENSOR, CHRISTIN

505 F.Supp.2d 283 (2007) Jose MARROQUIN, et al. v. Miguel CANALES, et al. Civil No. CCB-05-3393. United States District Court, D. Maryland. August 8, 2007. *284 *285 *286 Ellen D. Marcus, Leslie Berger Kiernan, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, Washington,

123 F.Supp.2d 1223 (2000) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Manuel Guillermo CARRILLO, a/k/a "Psycho," a/k/a "Memo," Hector Hinojosa Gonzalez, a/k/a "Hector Hinojosa," a/k/a "Antonio Rameroz," a/k/a "Manuel Gonzalez," Raul Atayde, a/k/a "Bam Bam," Andres Jaquin Luna III, a/k/a "Buddha," Emiliano Zapata Licon, a/k/a "Zap," Roger Jiron, Juan Castorena, a/k/a "Chuco," Augustine Olivas, a/k/a "Chucky," Oscar Pacheco-Vasquez, a/k/a "Loco," Jose

NARES, J. *669Following a physical altercation involving two groups of men, defendant Salvador Oswaldo Chavez knifed a member of the other group in the back and defendant Daniel Arce Gonzalez shot and killed another member of that group. Chavez and Gonzalez appeal judgments following their jury convictions of second degree murder ( Pen. Code,

110 F.Supp.2d 918 (2000) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Andrew ACOSTA, Mohammed Ayesh, Doug Beyreis, Christopher Colton, Carlos Diaz, Shaun Dougherty, Jorge Espada, Vernon Fields, Felix Guzman, Jerry Guzman, Bernardo Hernandez, Raul Maldonado, Daniel Martinez, Pedro Martinez, Gamaliel Matos, Natanael Matos, Antonio Mendez, Alvaro Mendoza, Daniel Mendoza, Raciel Mendoza, Raymond Mendoza, Maico Navejar, Larry Olson, Thomas Overland, Raymon

Filed 3/28/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, D069533 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCS273327) SALVADOR OSWALDO CHAVEZ et al., Defendants and Appellants. APPEAL

Filed 4/20/18 (unmodified opinion attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, D069533 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCS273327) SALVADOR OSWALDO CHAVEZ et a

246 F.Supp.2d 646 (2003) Julio Jasso ZERMENO, et al., Plaintiff, v. MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A.H-02-2862. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division. February 18, 2003. *648 Peter Michael Kelly, Kelly Jeremiah et al, Houston, TX, for plaintiffs. David J Beck, Beck Redden an

CANTU, Justice. This is an appeal from a conviction for murder. TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 19.-02 (Vernon Supp.1986). Appellant was indicted for capital murder, but was found guilty of the lesser offense of murder. The jury assessed punishment at 80 years’ confinement. Appellant’s first five grounds of error complain of actions by the trial court in overruling his special requested instructions on lesser inclu

ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING MOTIONS TO DECERTIFY CLASS MICHAEL J. SENG, United States Magistrate Judge. On April 19, 2011, the Court granted in part Plaintiffs’ Sabas Arrendondo, Jose Cue-vas, Hilario Gomez, Irma Landeros and Ro-salba Landeros (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion seeking class certification pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 85.) On March 22, 2013, Defendants f

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2011 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2011 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit