Cases

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. Appellant Shane 0. Moffat commenced this action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, seeking information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) that he believes will exonerate him from his conviction for first degree murder. The government produced certain heavily redacted documents in response to the complaint, and asser

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

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

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.

NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557- 1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us SJC-08733 COMMONWEALTH vs. SHANE MOFFAT. Hampden. May 8, 202

119 B.R. 201 (1990) In re Gordon H. MOFFAT, Debtor. Gordon H. MOFFAT, Appellant, v. David R. HABBERBUSH, Appellee. BAP No. CC-89-2062-POMe, Bankruptcy No. LA 88-20019-KM. United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted on June 25, 1990. Decided August 31, 1990. *202 Richard

MELANSON, Judge. Thomas David Moffat appeals from his judgment of conviction for attempted strangulation. Specifically, Moffat challenges the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, we vacate. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURE On May 9, 2010, Moffat engaged in a domestic di

McKAY, Circuit Judge. Defendant Dennis Augustine was convicted on two counts of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. Prior to trial, he filed two separate motions to suppress evidence. The first motion was to quash a warrant to search Defendant’s residence and to suppress evidence found in that search which led directly to his arrest. The second motion was to suppress Defen

BRISCOE, Chief Judge. This is a direct appeal by Tina Patricia Wiseman following her guilty plea to one count of conspiring to distribute oxycodone, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846. The district court calculated her guideline range to be 57-71 months, but sentenced her to a below-range sentence of 48 months. Wiseman argues on appeal that the district court committed proc

MORITZ, Circuit Judge. Defendants Michael Jacoby, Derek Zar, and Susanne Zar appeal convictions and sentences arising from their participation in a mortgage fraud scheme. The government tried the defendants together, but each defendant separately appealed and filed separate briefs. Because the defendants assert both joint and individual challenges to their convictions and sent

ORDER DENYING CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. Nos. 14 & 18) ALEXANDER L. PASKAY, Bankruptcy Judge. This is a chapter 11 case and the matters under consideration are two Motions for Summary Judgment, one filed by 21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc. (21st Century) and the other by Moffat Communications, Inc. (Defendant). The Motions were originally filed in a

639 F.3d 1262 (2011) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo BANUELOS-BARRAZA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 10-4125. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. April 7, 2011. Diana Hagen, Esq., Office of the United States Attorney, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Ann Marie Taliaferro, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat, Salt Lake City,

49 P.3d 673 (2002) 132 N.M. 412 2002-NMCA-067 Stephen MOFFAT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James A. BRANCH, Jr., Joseph J. Branney, and Elizabeth Vincoy, individually and as mother and next friend of Vernon Vincoy, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 21,509, 21,623. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. April 30, 2002.

118 P.3d 732 (2005) 2005-NMCA-103 Stephen MOFFAT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James A. BRANCH, Jr., Joseph J. Branney, and Elizabeth Vincoy, individually and as mother and next friend of Vernon Vincoy, Defendants-Appellees. No. 24,307. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. May 18, 2005. Certiorari Granted August 5, 2005.

33 So.3d 694 (2010) Colin J. MOFFAT, Appellant, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION and Indian Lake Estates, Inc., Appellees. No. 1D09-2210. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. February 24, 2010. Rehearing Denied April 22, 2010. *695 Colin J. Moffat, pro se, Appellant. Geri Atkinson

TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge. Brandon Barrick brought this action under the False Claims Act on behalf of the United States, alleging his former employer Parker-Migliorini International (PMI) illegally smuggled beef into Japan and. China. At the time of the scheme, China banned all imports of U.S. beef, and Japan imposed heightened standards, u

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTIONS TED STEWART, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the United States of America’s (the “Government”) Motion for Summary Judgment Against Funds Seized from Home Savings Bank Account # (Redacted) 8618 in the Name of Paul Gotay of at least $381,000.1 Also before the Court is the Government’s

*1250 SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge. Mr. Arturo Romero appeals the district court’s denials of the government’s motion to dismiss his indictment and his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The government confesses error on both issues and agrees the district court abused its discretion. We reverse and remand

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Dee Benson, United States District Judge Before the Court is Plaintiff and Relator Brandon Barrick’s (“Barriek”) Motion for Leave to Amend the Fust Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 55.) On December 22, 2015, the Court granted the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Barrick’s First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 47.) The Court dismissed Barrick’s reverse false claim and conspiracy clai

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* BRISCOE, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Appellant Ramey Clyde Ba