Cases

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Mauro Brito-Rivera raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 562 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc), in which we held that the generic, contemporary definition of sexual abuse of a minor does not require the age of consent to be below 17 years old. Accordingly, the motion for summary disposition is GRA

SUMMARY ORDER Defendants-Appellants Ramon and Felix Brito appeal from two orders that the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Scullin, J.) entered on January 19, 2012. In those orders, the district court refused to reduce the Defendants-Appellants’ sentences under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) to a term of imprisonment that fell below the Defendants-Appellants’ amended guideline ranges. We affirm for the

(2008) UNITED STATES of America, v. Jose BRITO, Defendant. No. 08 Cr. 420(SCR). United States District Court, S.D. New York. December 22, 2008. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER STEPHEN C. ROBINSON, District Judge. Jose Brito has been charged with two counts of violating the laws of the United States. The indictment charges that, on March 21, 200

677 F.Supp.2d 339 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. Francisco BRITO, Defendant. Criminal No. 09-10103-NMG. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. December 2, 2009. *340 Todd F. Braunstein, U.S. District Court, Boston, MA, for United States of America. MEMORANDUM & ORDER GORTON, District Judge

HOWARD, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. I agree that the statements by the anonymous 911 caller reporting Brito’s offense were non-testimonial and therefore were admitted consistent with Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004). See ante at 62-63. More specifically, I agree that the statements here were properly admitted even

MEMORANDUM ** J. Felix Brito-Giles appeals his conviction and 42-month sentence for illegal reentry after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for BritoGiles has filed a brief stating that he finds no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplementa

103 F.Supp.2d 42 (2000) UNITED STATES v. Alejandro BRITO, a.k.a. "Adancito" No. 00-CR-10172-NG. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 21, 2000. Sheila W. Sawyer, Assistant U.S. Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA, for Plaintiff United States. Jeffrey Denner, Lane, Altman & Owens, Boston, MA, for Defendant Brito.

MEMORANDUM * The defendant was convicted of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and interstate travel in aid of racketeering. Methamphetamine was found in a compartment welded to the wheel well of defendant’s vehicle. The defendant contends that the initial stop of his vehicle was improper. We disagree. Brito-Betancourt was driving at 1:45 in the morning, at a time when

162 F.3d 99 U.S.v.Brito* NO. 98-4207 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. October 19, 1998 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla. , No.93-00081-CR-DLG ; Appealing after remand 78 F.3d 599

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-50757 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PABLO SALINAS BRITO; ADRIAN BRITO; JESUS SALINAS BRITO; ADAN BRITO; IGNACIO BERUMEZ BRITO; BENJAMIN HERNANDEZ RODRIGUEZ, Defendants-Appellants. Appeals from

78 F.3d 599 U.S.v.Brito NO. 93-4981 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Feb 09, 1996 1 Appeal From: S.D.Fla., No. 93-00081-CR-DLG 2 AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN

October 20, 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT C.A. No. 19-3239 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANCISCO NICHOLAS BRITO, a/k/a “Nicholas Brito,” a/k/a “Jose,” Appellant (D.N.J No. 2:18-cr-00557-001) Present: McKEE, BIBAS, and FUENTES, Circuit Judges Submitted are (1) Appellant’s motion to publish the opinion [Dkt. No. 55]; and

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 19-3239 _______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FRANCISCO NICHOLAS BRITO a/k/a Nicholas Brito a/k/a Jose, Appellant _______________ O

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-4403 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANDRES ABELINO AYON-BRITO, a/k/a Hugo Ayon-Brito, a/k/a Joel Diaz Garcia, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at A

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

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

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Vladimir Salgado-Brito 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 (6th Cir. 2011). Salga-do-Brito has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevan

McKEOWN, Circuit Judge, dissenting: The key issue in this appeal is whether the phrase “term of imprisonment” in 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) and the federal Sentencing Guidelines includes time already served in state custody such that the court is not bound by the guideline minimum. The majority says yes, but I respectfully dissent. The statute relates to reduction of an original sentence based on retroacti

784 F.2d 403 *U.S.v.Brito 85-5362 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. 2/11/86 1 S.D.Fla. AFFIRMED 2 ---------------

PER CURIAM: * Ramon Jaimes Brito, federal inmate # 01798-298, appeals the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. Brito was incarcerated in Oregon at the time he filed his § 2241 petition. The district court, therefore, correctly determined that