Cases

MEMORANDUM** Defendant-Appellant Robert Lin was convicted after a trial before a magistrate judge of failing to obey a lawful order pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 2.32(a)(2), to return to his car during a traffic stop in Yosemite National Park. The district court upheld the conviction, and we affirm. Lin argues that the requisite mens rea under 36 C.F.R. § 2.32(a)(2) should be specific intent, an

511 F.3d 110 (2007) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Lin GUANG and Shi Yong Wei, Defendants-Appellants. Docket Nos. 05-4724-cr(L), 05-6171-cr(CON). United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: March 12, 2007. Decided: December 13, 2007. *111 *112

JOHN C. PORFILIO, Senior Circuit Judge. Following their pleas of guilty to one count of using or causing others to use altered or counterfeit access devices in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1029, Defendants George Ted Lin .and Chen Liang Kuo appeal their 80-month sentences. 1 They contend the district court erred when it e

TASHIMA, Circuit Judge. In this interlocutory appeal, the government challenges the district court’s decision to suppress statements made by defendant Lin Chen (“Chen”). Chen made the statements during an interview with an Immigration and Naturalization Services (“INS”) 1 agent who was investigating a third party suspec

OPINION PER CURIAM. The United States appeals from the judgment of the district court that dismissed the indictment based on a denial of defendants’ Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. While we share many of the concerns expressed by the district court in its opinion and order, United States v. Lin, 143 F.Supp.2d 783 (E.D.Ky.2001), we hold that dismissal of the indictment in its entirety was premat

MEMORANDUM2 Lin appeals his conviction for alien smuggling under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)® and § 1324(a)(1)(B)®. He argues that the district court abused its discretion by excluding from evidence the marine surveyor’s record of the condition of the ships. We review a district court’s refusal to admit evidence for abuse of discretion. United States v. Shirley, 884 F.2d 1130, 113

143 F.Supp.2d 783 (2001) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Pauline LIN, FU-TSUN Lin, Susan Lo, Ming Gardens Chinese Restaurant, Inc. August Moon Chinese Restaurant, Lin & Lo, Inc., Defendants. No. CRIM 00-170. United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Lexington Division. April 16, 2001. *784 David Marye, U.S. Attorne

05-4724-cr(L), 05-6171-cr(CON) United States v. Lin Guang, Shi Yong W ei UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2006 (Argued: March 12, 2007 Decided: December 13, 2007) Docket Nos. 05-4724-cr(L), 05-6171-cr(CON)

881 F.Supp. 34 (1995) UNITED STATES of America v. LIN, Hung Shun and Gao, Qiu, Defendants. Cr. No. 94-220. United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 29, 1995. *35 H. Heather Shaner; Penny Marshall, Federal Public Defender for the District of Columbia; and Cynthia Maria Wimer Lobo, Kiersh & Lobo, Washington, DC

PAUL KELLY, JR., Circuit Judge. Defendant-Appellant Lin Edward Davis appeals from the district court’s revocation of twenty-four months of his three-year term of supervised release. On appeal, Mr. Davis contends that the initiation of revocation proceedings by a probation officer exceeds the officer’s authority pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3603 and the United States Constitution. Mr. Davis

F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH JUL 6 1998 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

896 F.2d 544 U.S.v.Lin NO. 90-1042 United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. JAN 26, 1990 1 Appeal From: S.D.N.Y. 2 AFFIRMED.

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

*8JUDGMENT Per Curiam The court has considered this appeal on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the parties’ briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. CIR. R. 84(3). After giving full consideration to the issues, we have determined that a published opinion is not needed. See D.C. CIR, R.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of United States v. Davis , 588 U.S. ----,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DORA L. IRIZARRY, Chief Judge: Ying Lin (“Defendant”) is chained by Superseding Indictment (“S-l”) with: (1) smuggling in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 554 and 2; (2) conspiracy to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349; (3) obstruction of justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) and 2; (4) conspiracy to obstruct justice in violation of

925 F.Supp. 1507 (1996) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. LIN LYN TRADING, LTD., and Raymond Lynn Thomas, Defendants. No. 94-CR-168G. United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division. April 9, 1996. *1508 Wayne Dance, Asst. U.S. Atty., for plaintiff. Max D. Wheeler, Snow, Christensen & Martineau, Salt Lake

911 F.Supp. 494 (1996) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. LIN LYN TRADING, LTD. and Raymond Lynn Thomas, Defendants. No. 94-CR-168G. United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division. January 11, 1996. *495 Wayne Dance, Asst. U.S. Atty., U.S. Attorneys Office Salt Lake City, UT, for plaintiff. Max D Wheeler, Sno

OPINION FARRIS, Senior Circuit Judge: Defendant Wei Lin was charged with conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1594(c), and several counts of sex trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a). Lin pled guilty to the conspiracy count, which carried no mandatory minimum. See 18 U.S.C. § 1594(c). In exchange,

ZOBEL, S. D.J. On April 19, 2018, defendant was charged in a one-count indictment with illegal reentry after previously being deported, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Before the court is the government's motion to exclude several categories of evidence at trial. Docket # 57. I. Background