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 “Franklin A Murillo”
United States v. Mosquera-Murillopublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, Chief Judge On January 20, 2016, each of the defendants entered into a wired plea agreement under which they pleaded guilty to a one-count indictment of conspiring to distribute, and possess with intent to distribute, at least five kilograms of cocaine and 100 kilograms of marijuana on board a vessel subject to the jurisd
US Bank N.A. v. Murillopublic domain
US Bank N.A. v Murillo (2019 NY Slip Op 02743) US Bank N.A. v Murillo 2019 NY Slip Op 02743 Decided on April 10, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Ju
State v. Murillopublic domain
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Franklin County, No. 14-1-50337-6, Alex Ekstrom, J., entered June 2, 2015. Remanded with instructions by unpublished opinion per Fearing, C.J., concurred in by Korsmo and Siddoway, JJ.
United States v. Mosquera-Murillopublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, United States District Judge Defendants Alfredo Mosquera-Murillo, Joaquin Chang-Rendon, and Antonio Moreno-Membache (collectively, the “defendants”) are charged in a one-count indictment of conspiring to distribute, and possess with intent to distribute, at least five kilograms of cocaine and 100 kilograms of marijuana, on board a vessel subject to the jurisd
Murillo v. Kohl's Corp.public domain
ORDER J.P. Stadtmueller, U.S. District Judge On February 18, 2016, the plaintiffs filed suit, on behalf of themselves and all those similarly situated, against the defendants for purportedly engaging in a nationwide marketing scheme that is untrue, deceptive, and misleading to consumers. (See generally Docket #1). In many respects, this action parallels the allegations set forth in a case that was
United States v. Kielan Franklinpublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 20-30136 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 6:19-cr-00006-SEH-1 KIELAN BRETT FRANKLIN, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
United States v. Pellypublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** George Franklin Pelly appeals from the 13-month term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Pelly contends that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 *647L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), requires that senten
Miranda v. Dacruzpublic domain
DECISION Before this Court are two motions in limine filed by Maria Miranda ("Plaintiff"), one motion in limine filed by Francisco and Philomena DaCruz ("Defendants"), and one motion for summary judgment / in limine filed by Defendants. Defendants have not filed an objection to either of Plaintiff's motions. Plaintiff objects to both of Defendants' motions. For the reasons discussed herein, this Cour
State v. Bleapublic domain
VIGIL, Judge. {1} Defendant Joseph Blea was convicted of multiple counts of first degree criminal sexual penetration and first degree kidnapping involving four separate victims in two separate district court cases, and appeals. In both appeals, cause no. A-1-CA-34986 and A-1-CA-35085, Defendant contends that New Mexico's DNA Identification Act (the Act) NMSA 1978, §§ 29-16-1 to -13 (199
People v. Bastidaspublic domain
Opinion SIMONS, J. Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, enacted in 2014, reduced certain offenses that could be charged as either felonies or misdemeanors to misdemeanors. And, in newly enacted Penal Code section 1170.18, former subdivision (a),
Gordon v. Johnsonpublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, and DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. No. 1, 2 & 13) PONSOR, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, a lawful permanent U.S. resident held by the government pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), brought a petition for writ of
Dickinson v. Cosbypublic domain
BIGELOW, P. J. *1144In 2014, plaintiff Janice Dickinson publicly alleged that defendant William Cosby drugged and raped her in 1982. Cosby responded by issuing a demand letter and several press releases through his attorney, which expressed or implied that Dickinson was lying. Dickinson filed a complaint against Cosby for defamation and rela
Goodman v. Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corp.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOEL SCHNEIDER, United States Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs “Motion for a Protective Order to Limit *231Opt-in Depositions and Defendants’ Discovery Demands of the Opt-Ins.” [Doe. No. 186]. The issue to be addressed is the scope of permissible discovery in this conditionally
United States v. Thomas Hanktonpublic domain
HAYNES, Circuit Judge: When Derrick Smothers, Terrell Smothers, 1 and Thomas Hankton (collectively, “Defendants”) were originally sentenced, each received a sentence reduction for previously serving time on related state charges. Thirteen days after sentencing, the Government request
State v. Moorepublic domain
[Cite as State v. Moore, 2022-Ohio-409.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CLARK COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : Appellate Case No. 2021-CA-26 : v.
State v. Crossleypublic domain
[Cite as State v. Crossley, 2020-Ohio-6640.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT CLARK COUNTY STATE OF OHIO : : Plaintiff-Appellee : Appellate Case No. 2020-CA-10 : v.
State v. Vogtpublic domain
30 Kan. App.2d 1138 (2002) 55 P.3d 365 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. JUSTIN VOGT and JACOB GRABER, Appellants. Nos. 87,187, 87,188. Court of Appeals of Kansas. Opinion filed October 11, 2002. Michael C. Robinson, of Reynolds, Forker, Berkley, Suter, Rose & Graber, of Hutchinson, for appellants. Franklin Terrill Bruce,
Yeh v. Super. Ct.public domain
Filed 9/6/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR JAQUELYN YEH et al., Petitioners, A166537 v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF (Contra Costa County CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, Super. Ct. No. MSC22-
IN RE: Appraisal of Panera Bread Companypublic domain
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE APPRAISAL OF PANERA ) BREAD COMPANY ) C.A. No. 2017-0593-MTZ ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: October 7, 2019 Date Decided: January 31, 2020 Samuel T. Hirzel, II, Elizabeth A. DeFelice, and Melissa N. Donimirski, HEYMAN ENERIO GATTUSO & HIRZEL LLP, Wilmington, Delaware
Abeywardene v. Dejoypublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JINAPALA ABEYWARDENE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 24- 2353 (SLS) v. Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan DOUG TULINO, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Jinapala Abeywardene, proceedin