Cases

Case: 18-40790 Document: 00516004372 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/07/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED September 7, 2021

This opinion is subject to revision before publication UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES _______________ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Jesus D. CARDENAS, Sergeant United States Army, Appellant No. 20-0090 Crim. App. No. 20180416 October 28, 2020—Decided Date Januar

24-2734 U.S. v. Cardenas In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term, 2025 (Argued: January 14, 2026 Decided: February 18, 2026) Docket No. 24-2734 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee,

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Rene Cardenas 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). Cardenas has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflect

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit _____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-40692 FILED _____________ March 24, 2026 Lyle W. Cayce United States of

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Ru-bicel Cardenas-Mendoza 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). Cardenas-Mendoza has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portio

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Cecilio Luviano Cardenas 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). Luviano Cardenas has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Gabriel Cardenas 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). Cardenas has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record refle

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, filed August 28, 2014 (Doc. 9)(“PFRD”). No party has filed objections to the PFRD, and the deadline for filing objections has passed. The Court

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Maria Cardenas-Montelongo has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 788, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Cardenas-Montelongo has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portio

543 F.3d 731 (2008) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Heriberto CARDENAS-CARDENAS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 08-40210 Summary Calendar. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. September 25, 2008. Renata Ann Gowie, James Lee Turner, Asst. U.S. Attys., Houston, TX, for U.S. Marjorie A. Meyers, Fed. Pub. Def., Timothy William Crooks, Margare

SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Fermín Cardenas appeals from a final order issued on October 16, 2006, by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Wood, CJ.), denying his motion to compel the Government to move for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) and his request for an evidentiary hearing on the motion. Cardenas premised his motion on a claim that

MEMORANDUM** Manuel Francisco Cardenas appeals from his jury conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Cardenas contends that the district court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal under Fed.R.Crim.P. 29, because the Government failed to present

PER CURIAM: * Counsel appointed to represent Rudy Cardenas 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). Cardenas has filed a response. Our independent review of counsel’s brief, Cardenas’s response, and the record discloses no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motio

MEMORANDUM ** Luis Ricardo Cardenas-Reyes appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking his supervised release and imposing a 24-month sentence of imprisonment, plus a new 12-month term of supervised release. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Cardenas-Reyes’ counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a mot

629 F.Supp.2d 445 (2009) UNITED STATES of America v. Jaime CARDENAS-BORBON. Criminal No. 1:06-CR-0199-01. United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania. June 25, 2009. *446 Christy H. Fawcett, U.S. Attorney's Office, Harrisburg, PA, for United States of America. Daniel M. Myshin, Harrisburg, PA, for Jaime Cardenas-Borbon

MEMORANDUM ** Luis Ricardo Cardenas-Reyes appeals from the district court’s judgment revoking his supervised release and imposing a 24-month sentence of imprisonment, plus a new 12-month term of supervised release. Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Cardenas-Reyes’ counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a mot

PER CURIAM: * Jose A. Cardenas pleaded guilty to bribery of a public official, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(1)(A). Under the Sentencing Guidelines, the district court sentenced Cardenas to 24 months in prison and to three years of supervised release. At the request of the Government, the court also issued an alternative judgment, in the event that the Supreme Court extended its holding in <

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  No. 07-10553 Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  D.C. No. CR-05-01969-CKJ JOSE CARDENAS-MENDOZA, OPINION Defendant-Appellant.  Appeal from th

579 F.3d 1024 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose CARDENAS-MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 07-10553. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted December 10, 2008. Filed August 26, 2009. *1027 Francisco León, Francisco León P.C., Tuscon, AZ, for the appellant.