Cases

WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judge: Defendant Edwin Morales was convicted of possession of 2.27 kilograms of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and sentenced to 131 months in prison. The defendant challenges (1) the district court’s refusal to suppress the evidence seized at an immigration checkpoint; (2) the court’s refusal to grant h

WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judge: Defendant Edwin Morales was convicted of possession of 2.27 kilograms of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and sentenced to 131 months in prison. The defendant challenges (1) the district court’s refusal to suppress the evidence seized at an immigration checkpoint; (2) the court’s refusal to grant

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL VI CERTIORARI EDWIN GABRIEL procedente del ACEVEDO Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Recurrido KLCE202301479 Sala Superior de

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

*1166The defendant contends that the trial court erred in declining to discharge a sworn juror without conducting a sufficiently thorough inquiry regarding the juror’s prior unpaid internship with the prosecution’s office (see CPL 270.35). However, the defendant did not object to the sufficiency of the trial court’s inquiry prior to declining to discharge the juror, or request that any f

Motion for writ of error coram nobis denied. Present—Martoche, J.P., Smith, Peradotto, Green and Pine, JJ.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Patricia D. Marks, J.), rendered July 2, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of murder in the second degree. It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of murder in the second degree (Penal Law §

OPINION OF THE COURT John M. Leventhal, J. Defendant stands charged in this indictment with one count of criminal contempt in the second degree (Penal Law § 215.50 *696[3]), a class A misdemeanor, for writing a letter to the complainant in violation of an order of protection. Defendant and the People will be ready for trial within days.

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Elkins, J.), dated April 23, 2005, which, after a fact-finding hearing, denied his petition to modify an order of the same court (Turbow, J.), dated May 17, 2001, inter alia, permitting contact with his children only by mail. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

SENTENCIA El 27 de jimio de 2014 expedimos el auto de certiorari presentado por el Sr. José Lorenzo Hernández, la Sra. Carmen Luz Lorenzo Nieves y la Sociedad Legal de Ganancia-les compuesta por ambos (en conjunto, los peticionarios). Tras examinar los alegatos presentados por las partes y al estar en posición de resolver, se revocan las sentencias de los foros recurridos mediante las cuales se desestimó la causa de acción

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nevada denied.

Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico TRIBUNAL DE APELACIONES PANEL VIII EL PUEBLO DE PUERTO RICO Certiorari procedente del Recurrido Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Sala Superior de Fajardo v.

*1686 Justice GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. This case concerns a gender-based differential in the law governing acquisition of U.S. citizenship by a child born abroad, when one parent is a U.S. citizen, the other, a citizen of another nation. The main rule appears in

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Scarpino, J.), entered March 20, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $57,700. Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the complaint is dismissed. The plaintiff’s theory of the

MEMORANDUM ** Edwin Saul Morales-Galdamez appeals from the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). We dismiss the appeal. Morales-Galdamez contends that the appeal wavier in his plea agreement is unenforceable. First, he contends that he did not enter into his plea agreement knowingly and v

*416OPINION OF THE COURT Gerald Sheindlin, J. The defendant was indicted for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, Penal Law § 220.18 (1). At a hearing held immediately prior to jury selection, the prosecution sought permission to introduce evidence of the defendant’s prior conviction for criminal sale of a controlled sub

OPINION OF THE COURT Kaye, J. Did defendant have a right to be present when the trial court preliminarily examined a child-witness to determine whether she understood the nature of an oath? We conclude that defendant did not have that right, and accordingly sustain his conviction. I. In March 1988, defendant was indicted for rape, sodomy and

528 F.Supp.2d 13 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff v. GOMEZ-MORALES, et al., Defendant(s). Criminal No. 03-170(JAG). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. December 13, 2007. Lynn M. Doble-Salicrup, United States Attorney's Office, San Juan, PR, for Plaintiff. Francisco Rebollo-Casalduc, Ricardo Izurrieta-Ortega, Juan G. Nieves-Cassas, Nieves

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered April 11, 1989, convicting him of rape in the first degree (two counts) and sodomy in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The trial court conducted a hearing to determine whether one of the complaining witnesses, a nine year old child, was competent to test

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered April 19, 1988, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and burglary in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of the right to be present at a material stage of his trial. The record reveal