Cases

Case: 25-20198 Document: 52-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/16/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 25-20198 FILED

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Raquel Esquivel 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). Esquivel has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions

United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals _________________________ UNITED STATES Appellee v. Oscar ESQUIVEL-ESTRADA Corporal (E-4), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant No. 201800373 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary. Decided: 9 May

KELLY, Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant Antonio Esquivel-Rios appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion to suppress evidence. In Mr. Esquivel-Rios’s first direct appeal, we concluded that the record lacked the quantity and quality of information necessary for us to determine whether Mr. Es-quivel-Rios’s Fourth Amendment rights had been violated. Un

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Isauro Esquivel 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). Esquivel has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record re

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Frank Esquivel seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Carlos Alberto Esquivel 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). Esquivel has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant po

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JULIE A. ROBINSON, District Judge. Defendant Antonio Esquivel-Rios was convicted by a jury on one count of possessing with the intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § -841(a)(1). By order of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, these proceedings were remanded to this Court to reconsider whether the traffic stop of Defendant’s vehicle violated the

GORSUCH, Circuit Judge. Garbage in, garbage out. Everyone knows that much about computers: you give them bad data, they give you bad results. There was a time when the enforcement of traffic laws depended on officers lying in wait behind billboards watching cars flow past. Today, officers nearly as often rely on distant computer databases accessed remotely from their dashboard

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Rosales Esquivel (Rosales) 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). Rosales has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly,

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gustavo Esquivel-Celestino (Esquivel) 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). Esquivel has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and t

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Alberto Esquivel-Me-xia 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). Esquivel-Mexia has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordin

507 F.3d 1154 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jaime Lamon ESQUIVEL, Appellant. United States of America, Appellee, v. Ricardo Esquivel, Jr., Appellant. Nos. 06-3679, 06-3681. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: April 10, 2007. Filed: November 19, 2007. *1155

F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* MARY BECK BRISCOE, Circuit Judge. Ezequiel Robles Esquivel (Esquivel) pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Esquivel sought a two-level reduction in offense level pursuant to § 3B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines) alleging he was a minor participant in the c

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  No. 05-30355 Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  D.C. No. CR 02-0374 JCC JORGE LUIS ESQUIVEL-ORTEGA, OPINION Defendant-Appellant.  Appeal from the United States District Cou

PER CURIAM: * Rodolfo Esquivel-Juarez (Esquivel) appeals the 70-month sentence imposed after *464he pleaded guilty to one count of illegal reentry into the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Esquivel contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional and that this court should vacate his sentence and remand h

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jorge Esquivel-Palomino 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 GRA

PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Angel Esquivel-Cantera raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Valdez-Maltos, 443 F.3d 910, 911 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 265, 166 L.E.2d 205 (2006), and United States v. Garcia-Mendez, 420 F.3d 454 (5th Cir.2005), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 1398, 164 L.Ed.2d 1

PER CURIAM: * Counsel appointed to represent Rodolfo Esquivel-Juarez on appeal from the revocation of supervised release has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Esquivel-Juarez was notified of counsel’s request but has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the re