Cases

PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Herrera-Ruiz 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). Herrera-Ruiz has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant por

DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge. Automobiles were not the only thing that Miguel Pagan was selling at the dealership he owned in Hammond, Indiana. A jury concluded that Pagan and his cohort, Francisco Herrera-Ruiz, were involved in a drug conspiracy that used the facilities of Pagan Auto Sales, and it found both men guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, h

968 F.2d 415 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Alberto ROJAS-MARTINEZ and Olavo Michel, Jr., Defendants-Appellants.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Jose CARILLO-RUIZ, Martin Casas-Acevedo, EfrainGonzalez-Torres, Roberto Herrera, Miguel Herrera,and Alfredo Reyes-Marentes, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 91-8218, 91-8298. United States Court of Appea

POOLER, Circuit Judge: This appeal concerns the jury instructions given with respect to Count 21 of the indictment, which charged defendants-appellants Heriberto Martinez, aka Boxer, and Carlos Ortega, aka Silencio, with aiding and abetting a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), using or carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence or possessing a firearm in furtherance of that crime, in connection with the murder of Ma

MOORE, Circuit Judge. Appellants, a putative class of over 300 former sailors, appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal of their challenges to the Navy’s implementation of an Enlisted Retention Board (ERB) that resulted in their honorable discharges. We affirm. Background In a March 20

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

O’BRIEN, Circuit Judge. Denise Ann Vigil appeals from a twelvemonth prison sentence imposed on February 7, 2012, following a series of revocations of probation or supervised release. She argues the sentence is unreasonable because it is three months longer than the maximum recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines and no exceptional circumstances warranted the variance. The judge

745 F.Supp. 940 (1990) Haydee RUIZ, Plaintiff, v. Police Officer HERRERA, Police Sergeant Earley, Police Officer Krzeminski, Police Officer Monroe, Odel Jones, Barney Burden, and the Barney Burden Bailbond Company, Defendants. No. 89 Civ. 0535 (CSH). United States District Court, S.D. New York. August 30, 1990. *941 David S.J. Ne

*970C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 976; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 977; C. A. 6th Cir. Reported below: 116 Fed. Appx. 693; C. A. 5th Cir. Reported below: 117 Fed. Appx. 931; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 127 Fed. Appx. 472; C. A. 9th Cir. Reported below: 114 Fed. Appx. 351;

*970C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 976; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 125 Fed. Appx. 977; C. A. 6th Cir. Reported below: 116 Fed. Appx. 693; C. A. 5th Cir. Reported below: 117 Fed. Appx. 931; C. A. 11th Cir. Reported below: 127 Fed. Appx. 472; C. A. 9th Cir. Reported below: 114 Fed. Appx. 351;

418 F.Supp.2d 915 (2006) UNITED STATES of America v. Montserrat TREJO-PALACIOS aka: Betzani Herrera-Ruiz No. Crim.B-05-714. United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Brownsville Division. March 8, 2006. *916 Oscar Ponce, Assistant United States Attorney, Brownsville, TX, for Plaintiffs. Paul G. Hajjar, Assistant Federal Pu

(Reported below: 72 Fed. Appx. 219); (71 Fed. Appx. 428); (72 Fed. Appx. 984); (72 Fed. Appx. 995); (71 Fed. Appx. 433); (73 Fed. Appx. 694); (73 Fed. Appx. 72); (72 Fed. Appx. 991); (71 Fed. Appx. 418); (71 Fed. Appx. 430); (72 Fed. Appx. 982); (72 Fed. Appx. 225);

*999(Reported below: 73 Fed. Appx. 83); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 82); (73 Fed. Appx. 82); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx

(Reported below: 72 Fed. Appx. 219); (71 Fed. Appx. 428); (72 Fed. Appx. 984); (72 Fed. Appx. 995); (71 Fed. Appx. 433); (73 Fed. Appx. 694); (73 Fed. Appx. 72); (72 Fed. Appx. 991); (71 Fed. Appx. 418); (71 Fed. Appx. 430); (72 Fed. Appx. 982); (72 Fed. Appx. 225);

*999(Reported below: 73 Fed. Appx. 83); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx. 82); (73 Fed. Appx. 82); (73 Fed. Appx. 81); (73 Fed. Appx

*966(Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 F

539 U.S. 966 Alva-Otoyav.United StatesAvila-Aguilarv.United StatesCastillo-Rosales, aka Castillov.United StatesMauricio Contrerasv.United StatesGarcia-Sandovalv.United StatesHerrera-Munizv.United StatesMireles-Hernandezv.United StatesMundo-Jimenezv.United StatesRamirez-Sosav.United StatesRios-Garciav.United StatesRuiz-Lopezv.<

*966(Reported below: 61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 Fed. Appx. 922); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 921); (61 Fed. Appx. 920); (61 F

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 23-3262 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellee, 4:23-cr-00139- JAS-MAA-1 v. WARDY ALFONSO LIBERATO OPINION Defendant

Case: 22-50951 Document: 00517019362 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/03/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit _____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 22-50951 FILED _____________