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. Badillo”
United States v. Badillopublic domain
Case: 21-40459 Document: 00516353263 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 10, 2022
United States v. Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Badillo, Jr., has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Badillo has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portion
United States v. Badillo-Amayapublic domain
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Hugo Badillo-Amaya has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Badillo-Amaya has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relev
United States v. Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM: E. Vaughn Dunnigan, appointed counsel for Adolfo Badillo in these consolidated direct criminal appeals, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant, because, in her opinion, the appeals are without merit. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s asses
United States v. Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM: E. Vaughn Dunnigan, appointed counsel for Adolfo Badillo in these consolidated direct criminal appeals, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant, because, in her opinion, the appeals are without merit. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s asses
United States v. Badillopublic domain
ORDER These consolidated appeals were brought by two men who were caught unloading 3248 pounds of marijuana in a Chicago warehouse. One of the appellants, Rodrigo Torres, pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy and distribution charges, though apparently the district court later dismissed the distribution count and entered a judgment of conviction only on the conspiracy count. Torres filed a notice of appeal because he is unhappy with his sen
United States v. Badillopublic domain
714 F.2d 117 U. S.v.Badillo 82-1045 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Second Circuit 10/5/82 1 S.D.N.Y. AFFIRMED
United States v. Garcia-Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Adolfo Gareia-Badillo has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Garcia-Badillo has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevan
United States v. Penunuri-Badillopublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Gustavo Adolfo Penunuri-Badillo appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importing cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(ii), and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(ii)(II). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Pen
United States v. Penunuri-Badillopublic domain
MEMORANDUM ** Gustavo Adolfo Penunuri-Badillo appeals from the 48-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for importing cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(a)(1), (b)(l)(B)(ii), and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(ii)(II). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Pen
United States v. Sanchez-Badillopublic domain
540 F.3d 24 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. David SANCHEZ-BADILLO and Raymond Mendez-Echevarria, Defendants, Appellants. Nos. 05-1800, 05-2045, 05-2047. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard May 7, 2007. Decided August 27, 2008. *27 Rafael F. Castro Lang, for appellant David Sanchez-B
Badillo-Rangel v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
United States v. Sanchez-Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM. After carefully considering the briefs and record in these consolidated appeals, we affirm the pre-trial detention orders for substantially the reasons stated by the district court. Our review is independent, tempered by a degree of deference to the determination below.
Badillo-Leija v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
United States v. Ortiz-De Badillopublic domain
PER CURIAM: * Lucia Del Carmen Ortiz-De Badillo appeals from her guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry following deportation. Ortiz-De Badillo argues that the district *46court erred by relying on the presentence report to determine that her prior conviction for alien smuggling was committed for profit. Ortiz-De Badillo concedes that thi
Badillo-Leija v. United Statespublic domain
540 U.S. 1081 BADILLO-LEIJAv.UNITED STATES. No. 03-6995. Supreme Court of United States. December 8, 2003. 1 Appeal from the C. A. 5th Cir. 2 Certiorari denied. Reported below: 70
Badillo-Leija v. United Statespublic domain
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mackenzie v. Badillo (Meza)public domain
OPINION GRANTING THE BADILLO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DENYING THE TRUSTEE’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT RANDOLPH J. HAINES, Bankruptcy Judge. This issue here is whether a debtor’s change of the beneficiary designated on a term life insurance policy is a transfer of an interest in property that can be avoided as a fraudulent transfer under Code § 548. The Court concludes that the
CARL E. STEWART, Circuit Judge: Roberto Lopez-Urbina and Raul Badil-lo-Rangel were both charged with carjacking (counts 1-3), using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence (counts 4-6), conspiracy to use and carry a firearm during a crime of violence (count 7), and transportation of stolen vehicles (count 8) in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2119, 924(c) and (o), 2312, and
United States v. Sanchez-Badillopublic domain
24 F.3d 254 U.S.v.Sanchez-Badillo* NO. 93-4964 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. May 20, 1994 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. 2