Cases

Appellate Case: 23-7017 Document: 55 Date Filed: 09/09/2024 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS September 9, 2024

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Criminal Action No. 93-97-2 (BAH) ERIC A. HICKS, Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION

19-590-cr United States v. Hicks 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 4 August Term, 2020 5 6 (Argued: February 11, 2021 Decided: July 16, 2021) 7 8 Docket No. 19-590-cr 9 10 _____________________________________ 11 12 UNITED STATE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) Criminal No. 17-0024 (PLF) ) Civil Action No. 18-0119 (PLF) ANDRE HICKS, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) Criminal No. 17-0024 (PLF) ) Civil Action No. 18-0119 (PLF) ANDRE HICKS, )

BERYL A. HOWELL, Chief Judge In 1994, the defendant Eric Hicks was sentenced to two concurrent terms of life imprisonment, without possibility of parole, after his conviction at trial of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base and to participate in a Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization ("RICO"), and three counts of distributing cocaine base, in violation of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Criminal Action No. 93-0097(BAH) ERIC A. HICKS, Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER In 1994, the defendant Eric Hicks was sentenced to two concurrent terms

CONSENT FOR N|OD|F|CAT|ON OF SUPERV|SED RELEASE/PROBAT|ON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT forthe _ FILED District of Columbla APR 5 - 2017 C|erk, U. S. District& Bankruptcy Courts for the Distr|ct of Columbla UNITED STATES OF AMERICA QQB§QLMDMQLB Defendant ) ) vs. ) Criminal NO. wci ) ) ) CONSENT TO MODIFY PROBATION/SUPERVISED RELEASE The parties agree the defendant‘s conditions of supervised release/probation should be modified and being no objection thereto, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT the d

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

U NITED S TATES N AVY –M ARINE C ORPS C OURT OF C RIMINAL A PPEALS _________________________ No. 201600170 _________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. THOMAS L. HICKS Corporal (E-4), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS (Doc. 15) Timothy S. Black, United States District Judge This criminal case is before the Court on Defendant’s motion to suppress (Dóc. 15) and the Government’s response in opposition (Doc. 16). The Court held an eviden-*738tiary hearing on April 21, 2016. (Min. Entry, Apr. 21, 2016).1

BRISCOE, Chief Judge. Defendant Brian Hicks entered a conditional plea of guilty and was convicted of (i) one count of possession with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(ii)(II); (ii) one count of possession of a firearm or ammunition by a felon, in

CCA 20121172. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file the supplement to the petition for grant of review granted to June 23, 2014.

CCA 38191. [See also APPEALS— SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS this date.]

CCA 38191. On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, it is ordered that said petition is hereby granted, and the decision of the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed.* [See ORDERS GRANTING PETITION FOR REVIEW this date.] It is noted that the decision of the United States Air Force C

ORDER Sylvester Hicks appeals from the denial of his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) to reduce his prison sentence based on a retroactive decrease in the base offense levels for crack-cocaine offenses. But that change did not benefit Hicks because his imprisonment range was calculated under the career-offender guideline. We thus affirm the judgment. In 2007 Hicks pleaded guilty to one count of possessing crack

ORDER Charnell Hicks pleaded guilty to distributing crack cocaine, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and was sentenced to 132 months in prison — 56 months below the calculated guidelines range. Two years later the government moved to reduce Hicks’s sentence to 84 months based on his substantial assistance to law enforcement. See Fed.R.CrimP. 35(b)(2). In response Hicks sought a deeper reduction to 45 months based on additio

OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge. Defendant Edward Charles Hicks pled guilty to one count of theft of a firearm from a federal firearms licensee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(u) and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At sentencing, he requested a downward ‘variance’ from the 33-to-41 month range of custody calculated pursuant to the Unit

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: David A. Hicks seeks to appeal the district court’s order affirming the magistrate judge’s orders denying Hicks’ motion seeking discovery from the Government and his motion to submit photographs. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Clarence Hicks 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.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice o