Cases

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 22-1918 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. ALEJANDRO CORTÉS-LÓPEZ, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Francisco A. Besosa, U.S. District Judge]

SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge. On January 13, 2016, Marco Antonio Cortes-Gomez was indicted with two codefendants on counts related to a methamphetamine conspiracy (" Cortes-Gomez I "). His trial began on November 29, 2016. The interim included two superseding indictments, dismissal of the indictment and the filing of a new one with identical charges (" Cortes-Gom

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 18-1768 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. RICHARD GERARDO CORTÉS-MALDONADO, a/k/a Richard Cortés-Maldonado, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Gustavo A. Gelp

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Pubhc Defender appointed to represent Jesus Cortes-Campos 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). Cortes-Campos has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant po

SELYA, Circuit Judge. In this sentencing appeal, defendant-appellant Héctor Cortés-Medina insists that his 168-month sentence is both procedurally flawed and substantively unreasonable. After careful consideration, we affirm the sentence. This appeal has its roots in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Puerto Rico. The indictment alleged that the defendant served as an “

SELYA, Circuit Judge. In this sentencing appeal, defendant-appellant Héctor Cortés-Medina insists that his 168-month sentence is both procedurally flawed and substantively unreasonable. After careful consideration, we affirm the sentence.1 This appeal has its roots in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Puerto Rico. The indictment alleged tha

MEMORANDUM ** Julio Cortes appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Cortes contends that the district court erred by failing to grant his request for a sentence below the Guidelines range. We review for reaso

PER CURIAM: Miguel Caridad, appointed counsel for Francisco Virgilio Cortez-Acosta in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, an

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Manuel Cortes-Ortiz (Cortes) 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). Cortes has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * TERRENCE L. O’BRIEN, Circuit Judge. Christian Omar Cortes-Regalado pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). He was sentenced to 96 months imprisonment. Finding no is

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alfredo Cortes-De La Torre 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). Cortes-De La Torre has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and t

*134SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Anthony Cortes appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Scheindlin, J.) denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s ruling on a motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Bo

*134SUMMARY ORDER Defendant-Appellant Anthony Cortes appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Scheindlin, J.) denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s ruling on a motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Bo

MEMORANDUM ** Julio Cortes appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Cortes contends that the district court erred by failing to grant his request for a sentence below the Guidelines range. We review for reaso

ORDER and MEMORANDUM ** The panel has voted to grant the petition for panel rehearing. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to *981rehear the matter en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 35. The petition for panel rehearing is gran

MEMORANDUM ** Walter Cortes appeals from the district court’s order re-sentencing him to 97 months in prison for attempted car-jacking, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2119. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and we affirm. Cortes contends that the district court erred by denying his requested sentencing reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3El.l(a) for acceptance of responsibility bec

*611MEMORANDUM ** Bertin Cortes-Luis appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea and his subsequent sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). We affirm. Cortes-Luis argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his p

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alejandro Cortes-Melendez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is

PER CURIAM. The only issue in this appeal is whether the District Court erred in failing to grant Romero a downward departure for substantial assistance where the Government did not move for one. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), this Circuit has determined that sentencing issues are best determined by the District Court in the fir

PER CURIAM. The government has asked for summary disposition of this appeal pursuant to Local Rule 27(c). The government has shown that Antonio Cortes’s claim of sentencing factor manipulation, the only issue he raises on appeal, is without merit. “[Sentencing factor manipulation is a claim only for the extreme and unusual case.”