Cases

DECISION AND ORDER VICTOR MARRERO, District Judge. By indictment filed on October 30, 2003, the Government charged Andres Marte (“Marte”) with one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (“Count One”) among other charges. On August 24, 2005, Marte pled guilty to Count One pursuant to a written plea agreement

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

537 U.S. 896 MARTEv.UNITED STATES. No. 02-5125. Supreme Court of United States. October 7, 2002. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT. 2 C. A. 1

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1947 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. RONALD YOEL MARTE CARMONA, a/k/a Alberto Gonzalez Carmona, a/k/a Guy Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Douglas P. Wood

KAYATTA, Circuit Judge. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Santos Marte-de la Cruz pled guilty to attempted illegal reentry into the United States following removal subsequent to a conviction for an aggravated felony, in violation of - 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). He was sentenced to thirty-three months’ imprisonment. He now appeals his conviction and sentence on the

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-appellant Henry Marte-Cruz appeals from the district court’s judgment entered July 2, 2014, convicting him, following a three-day jury trial, of unlawful transportation of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3). The district court sentenced Marte-Cruz principally to thirteen months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release. On appeal, Marte-Cruz challenges the district court’s decis

798 F.Supp.2d 511 (2011) UNITED STATES of America v. Jose MARTE, Defendant. No. 11 Civ. 2299(DC). No. 08 Cr. 1131(DC). United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 20, 2011. Preet Bharara, Esq., by Antonia M. Apps, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney, *512 New York, NY, United States Attorney for the Southern District of

07-1013-cr United States v. Marte Robles UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT _____________________ August Term, 2008 (Argued: January 13, 2009 Decided: April 9, 2009) Docket No. 07-1013-cr (L) ___________________

305 F.Supp.2d 144 (2004) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Rafael MARTE, Defendant. Criminal No. 02-278(DRD). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. February 28, 2004. *145 Ramon L. Garay-Medina, Garay Medina Law Office, San Juan, PR, for Defendant. Daniel J. Vaccaro, United States Attorney's Office, Pretrial

SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of said district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED. Defendant-appellant Maximo Osiris Minaya appeals from the February 5, 2001 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Michael B. Mukasey, Chief Judge), convicting him, following a jury trial, of one count of conspiracy

BOWNES, Senior Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellant Jose Marte, along with nineteen other individuals, was charged in a multi-count indictment of knowingly and intentionally conspiring to possess with intent to distribute and distributing quantities of heroin in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Page three of the indictment stat

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

OPINION PER CURIAM. Petitioner, Martin Antonio Marte, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order of removal. For the following reasons, we will deny the petition for review. I. Marte is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic. Marte entered the country as a lawful permanent resident in 1986, when he was two years old. In July 2005,

OPINION PER CURIAM. Felix Antonio Blanco Marte, a citizen of the Dominican Republic, was admitted to the United States in 1992, as a lawful permanent resident. In August 2009, Blanco Marte was sentenced in New Jersey state court for two separate stalking convictions.1 See N.J.S.A. § 2C:12-10(b), (c), (d). The Government later charged Blanco Marte with being removable as a

OPINION PER CURIAM. Petitioner, Martin Antonio Marte, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order of removal. For the following reasons, we will deny the petition for review. I. Marte is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic. Marte entered the country as a lawful permanent resident in 1986, when he was two years old. In July 2005,

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied. Same case below, 417 Fed. Appx. 216.

CARNES, Circuit Judge: Roberto Antonio Marte appeals his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326 for attempted illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. His principal contention on appeal is that 8 C.F.R. § 212.2 either authorized his conduct or rendered § 1326 unconstitutionally vague. Marte also raises contentions about the district court’s granting of two gover

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Francisco Marte appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Defendants and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the distr

PER CURIAM. Appellant, who pled guilty to two counts stemming from his unlawful reentry into the United States following deportation, claims that the district court erred in refusing to grant a downward departure in his sentence. We conclude that we have no jurisdiction to review this claim and therefore dismiss the appeal. A district court’s discretionary