Cases

OPINION BY WECHT, J. Jose Carrasquillo (“Appellant”) appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on November 80, 2010. Originally, Appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of unlawful contact with a minor,1 and one count each of rape,2 involuntary deviate sexual intercourse,3 aggravated indecent assault,4</

*694 OPINION Chief Justice SAYLOR.1 In this appeal, we consider the criteria governing the disposition of a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea. Our decision turns on the conclusion that a bare assertion of innocence is not, in and of itself, a sufficient reason to require a court to grant such a reques

HOWARD, Circuit Judge. Robur Otero Carrasquillo brought an action in the Puerto Rico District Court against his former employer, Pharmacia Corporation, 1 his former supervisor, Zaida Sanabria, and unnamed administrators and fiduciaries of Pharmacia’s separation benefits plan. At its core, the complaint alleges that Pharmaci

OPINION OF THE COURT MARTIN, Judge: A panel of officer and enlisted members sitting as a general court-martial convicted appellant, contrary to his pleas, of one specification of conspiracy to commit robbery with a firearm, one specification of conspiracy to commit burglary, one specification of robbery with a firearm, and one specification of burglary,

382 F.Supp.2d 300 (2005) Robur OTERO CARRASQUILLO, María T. Negrón Cedeño, and Jennifer M. Otero Negrón, Plaintiffs, v. PHARMACIA, et al., Defendants. No. CIV 03-1651JAF. United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. August 15, 2005. *301 *302 *303 Vilma M.

795 A.2d 1141 (2002) STATE of Vermont v. Edward CARRASQUILLO. No. 00-438. Supreme Court of Vermont. January 22, 2002. *1142 Present: AMESTOY, C.J., DOOLEY, MORSE, JOHNSON, SKOGLUND, JJ. ENTRY ORDER This is an appeal by defendant Carrasquillo from the trial court's limitation of Carrasquillo's cross-

324 F.Supp.2d 428 (2004) Nestor CARRASQUILLO, Plaintiff, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. No. 03-CV-9027 (CM). United States District Court, S.D. New York. June 25, 2004. *429 *430 *431 *432 Nestor Carrasquil

LEVIN H. CAMPBELL, Chief Judge. Defendant Pedro Carrasquillo Plaza appeals from his conviction for aiding and abetting the armed robbery of a United States post office in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 2114 (1982). Defendant advances three arguments as to why his conviction should be overturned: 1) the government failed to disclose before trial the existence of written statements

Mr. Justice Teavieso delivered the opinion of the court. The defendant association established several years ago, in the city of Hnmacao, a Hospital known as the “Ryder Memorial Hospital,” in which all kinds of diseases are treated and operations and childbirth cases are handled. The plaintiff, Conchita L. de Carrasquillo, who was about to give birth, entered the defendant’s hospital on Decem

Appeal from a judgment of the Oswego County Court (Donald E. Todd, J.), rendered December 8, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal sexual act in the second degree (six counts), sexual abuse in the second degree (two counts), and sexual abuse in the third degree (three counts). It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In appeal

Appeal from a judgment of the Oswego County Court (Donald E. Todd, J.), rendered December 8, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal sexual act in the second degree (six counts), sexual abuse in the second degree (two counts), and sexual abuse in the third degree (three counts). It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: In appeal

People v Curry (2020 NY Slip Op 20313) People v Curry 2020 NY Slip Op 20313 [70 Misc 3d 35] Accepted for Miscellaneous Reports Publication Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department, 9th and 10th Judicial Districts Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to J

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT COMMONWEALTH vs. RICHARD DILWORTH Docket: SJC-13547 Dates: May 6, 2024 - September 6, 2024 Present: <

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 24-1905 LORNA ORABONA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. SANTANDER BANK, N.A., Defendant, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND [Hon. Mary S. McElroy, U.S. District Judge]

709 F.Supp.2d 132 (2010) Carmen ROSA-MELENDEZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. INVACARE CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. Civil No. 09-1303 (FAB). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. May 6, 2010. *133 Cesar A. Andreu, Andreu & Andreu, Edif Centro de Seguros, San Juan, PR, Francisco J. Andreu-Ramirez, Megwinoff Law Offices, Mi

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit _____________________ No. 21-1251 DIANE LAWLESS, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. TOWN OF FREETOWN, et al., Defendants, Appellants. _____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

2024 IL App (1st) 230330 SIXTH DIVISION August 23, 2024 No. 1-23-0330 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 231 KA 14-02247 PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, DEJOSEPH, AND SCUDDER, JJ. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD M. SWITTS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.) LINDA M. CAMPBELL, SYRACUSE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. GREGORY S. OAKES, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OSWEGO (AMY L. HALLENBECK OF COUNS

OPINION AND ORDER Enrique S. Lamoutte, United States Bankruptcy Judge This adversary proceeding is before the court upon the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Ingard Cecile McCon-nie Navarro (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff’ or “Debtor”) arguing that creditor Banco Popular de Puerto Rico and Select Portfolio Servicing, as servicing agent for DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. (hereinafter refer

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr