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 “United States v. Aurelio-Hernandez”
Aurelio Hernandez Aguilar v. Statepublic domain
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS <
Guadalupe Hernandez v. Aurelio Leo Larapublic domain
United States v. Hernandezpublic domain
PER CURIAM: Felipe Aurelio Hernandez seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).
United States v. Solispublic domain
299 F.3d 420 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Jose Cleotide SOLIS, also known as Little Cocho; Ecliserio Martinez Garcia; Salvador Pineda Contreras, also known as Chino; Francisco Favela, also known as Jr., also known as Big Jr., also known as Dreamer; Alfonzo Meza; Arturo Meza, also known as Jr.; Hilario Merlan Solis, also known as Cocho; Aurelio Mendez; Jose Alberto Meza, also known as Beefy, Defendants-Appellants. <
United States v. Solispublic domain
PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: This appeal arises from a 36-count indictment of 29 defendants for conspiracy to distribute heroin and cocaine in Plano, Texas and individual violations of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Eleven defendants went to trial, ten were convicted of conspiracy and various individual drug offenses, and nine — Jose Cleotide Solis, Ec-liserio Martinez Garcia,
Sustache-Rivera v. United Statespublic domain
LYNCH, Circuit Judge. In March 1993, a jury convicted David Sustache-Rivera (Sustache) of three separate carjackings in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2119. If a carjacking results in “serious bodily injury,” then the statute allows for a greater length of imprisonment. The judge found that one of the carjackings had resulted in serious bodily injury and so imposed a greater sentence. All
United States v. Vieira Candelariopublic domain
LEVIN H. CAMPBELL, Senior Circuit Judge. Defendant-appellant Aurelio Vieira-Cande-lario was indicted in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island for unlawful reentry into the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Vieira moved to quash the indictment and to dismiss, collaterally attacking the deportation order upon which the in
United States v. Vieira Candelariopublic domain
USCA1 Opinion UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUITT ____________________ No. 93-1274 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. AU
Grayson v. United Statespublic domain
748 F.Supp. 854 (1990) Ivan E. GRAYSON, as personal representative of the Estate of Hae Yon Sin Grayson (wife), Ivan E. Grayson, as personal representative of the Estate of Akilah Kyong Hae Grayson (daughter), Ivan E. Grayson, as personal representative of the Estate of Marcia Ji Hae Grayson (daughter), and Ivan E. Grayson, individually, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. No. 89-10041-Civ.
United States v. Vieira-Candelariopublic domain
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PETTINE, Senior District Judge. The government charged Aurelio Vieira-Candelario with violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326— unlawful reentry into the United States after a prior order of deportation without first seeking the permission of the Attor*118ney General of the United States.1 The defendant filed two
United States v. Aurelio Avila-Damianpublic domain
5 F.3d 540NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.AURELIO AVILA-DAMIAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50690. United States C
United States v. Hector Alvarezpublic domain
810 F.2d 879 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Hector ALVAREZ, Defendant-Appellant. No. 83-5208. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 7, 1986.Decided Feb. 17, 1987.As Amended Feb. 17, 1987. Allan Ides, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
United States v. Riverapublic domain
486 F.Supp. 1025 (1980) UNITED STATES of America v. Ricardo E. RIVERA et al. Crim. No. 3-79-190. United States District Court, N. D. Texas, Dallas Division. January 11, 1980. *1026 William M. Ravkind, Dallas, Tex., for Redmon and Baker. Ernest W. Kuehne, Jr., Dallas, Tex., for Hunter, Maull, Pugh and Baker. Michael
Clements v. League of United Latin American Citizenspublic domain
800 S.W.2d 948 (1990) William P. CLEMENTS, Governor of the State of Texas, et al., Appellant, v. The LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN AMERICAN CITIZENS (LULAC), et al., Appellee. No. 13-90-146-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Corpus Christi. December 6, 1990. Rehearing Overruled January 10, 1991. *950 James C. Thompson, Asst
Aguilar v. Statepublic domain
202 S.W.3d 840 (2006) AURELIO HERNANDEZ AGUILAR, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. No. 10-05-00260-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco. Opinion delivered and filed July 26, 2006. Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and, Justice REYNA. OPINION FELIPE REYNA, Justice. A jury convicted Aurelio Hernandez Agui
KYONG HO SHIN v. Holderpublic domain
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge: We consider a non-citizen’s eligibility for a waiver of inadmissibility under § 212(k) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(k) (“ § 21200 waiver” or “ § 212(k) relief’). Section 212(k) applies to “immigrants who were unaware of their ineligibility for admission and who could not have discovered the ineligibility by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Senica v.
Tobias Bermudez Chavez v. Occidental Chemical Corp.public domain
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
Lashawnda Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., etpublic domain
Case: 19-60719 Document: 00515527194 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 14, 2020
Terrance Tyrone Phillips v. State of Floridapublic domain
PER CURIAM. This case is before the Court on appeal from two judgments of conviction of first-degree murder and two sentences of death. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, *215§ 3(b)(1), Fla. Const. Terrance Phillips (Phillips), was convicted in Duval County of the murders of Mateo Hemandez-Perez and Reynaldo Antunes-Padilla. The jury also convicted Phillips of
Lashawnda Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., etpublic domain
Case: 19-60719 Document: 00515528044 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/14/2020 REVISED August 14, 2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED