Cases

FILED Appellate Case: 19-3256 Document: 010110690141 United Date Filed: States CourtPage: 05/27/2022 of Appeals 1 Tenth Circuit

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS LEO T. SOROKIN, District Judge. Defendant Foster Starks, Jr.’s motion to suppress touches upon a serious issue that *228has been the subject of much discussion by, among others, Courts and law enforcement leaders: whether African Americans are stopped and searched by police because of their race.

KAYATTA, Circuit Judge. This case makes its second appearance on our docket. The first appeal followed the conviction of Foster Starks, Jr. for possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). We vacated that conviction because the district court erred in finding that Starks lacked standing to challenge the lawfulness of a traffic stop that led to his arrest and the d

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Travis Starks appeals the district court’s oral order, entered on the docket on February 20, 2013, denying his motion to compel the Government to file a substantial assistance motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm as St

PER CURIAM: Ernest Lashawn Starks and Cameron Rashun Byrd appeal their convictions after a jury trial on carjacking and firearms offenses and the sentences they received for those convictions. Both contend the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions. In addition, Byrd argues portions of his sentence violate the Constitution. And Starks asserts that he should not have been tried together with Byrd and that his se

THOMPSON, Circuit Judge. Foster Starks, Jr. was not having a good day. First, he learned that his son had been arrested, then he was tasked with the unenviable job of retrieving a rental car from the son’s irate girlfriend. Lastly, as he was nearing home that night, he saw a State Trooper’s blue lights reflected in the rental’s rearview mirror. So one could say that the cherry o

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) ) ) Criminal Action No. 93-CR-315-2 (RCL) v. ) ) EZELL A. STARKS ) ) Defendant. ) ) MEMORANDUM & ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Defendant Ezell Starks’ motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(0)(2) to reduce his sentence based on amendments to the United States Sentencing Guidelines is before this Court. Upon consideration of the motion and the entire record herein, the motion will be DENIED. II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL B

PER CURIAM: * Marvin Lydell Starks, federal prisoner # 35930-180, seeks leave to appeal in for-ma pauperis (IFP) from the denial of his motion to reduce his sentence, which the district court treated as a 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. He also moves for the appointment of counsel. Starks was convicted by a jury in 2004 of possession with intent to distribute “crack” cocáine within 1000 feet of a

PER CURIAM: Thomas John Butler, appointed counsel for Kendell Lee Starks in this appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Starks’s conviction and

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Travis Starks appeals from a 188-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine, 50 grams or more of cocaine base, and 100 grams or more of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Jermaine D. Starks 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). Starks has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Jermaine D. Starks 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). Starks has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

PER CURIAM: Thomas John Butler, appointed counsel for Kendell Lee Starks in this appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Starks’s conviction and

551 F.3d 839 (2009) UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Marvin T. STARKS, Appellant. No. 08-2590. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: December 11, 2008. Filed: January 13, 2009. *840 John Vanderslice, argued, AFPD, Lincoln, NE, for appellant. Robert C. Sigler, argued, AUSA, Omaha,

MEMORANDUM** Appellant Antonio Starks appeals his sentence of 151 months, which was imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1). We dismiss in light of the valid appeal waiver. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that an appeal waiver is valid when it is en

301 F.Supp.2d 76 (2004) UNITED STATES of America v. Michael STARKS No. CRIM.03-10187-DPW. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. February 2, 2004. *77 *78 William H. Connolly, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA, for USA, Plaintiff. Miriam Conrad Federal Defender's Offi

ORDER Nick Starks appeals the sentence imposed upon his conviction for armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a), (d), and 2. The parties have expressly waived oral argument, and, upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). On November 14, 2000, a grand jury indicted Starks on one count of armed bank robbery and one count of using

MEMORANDUM ** Roy Lee Starks appeals his conviction and sentence on one count of transporting a minor in interstate commerce with the intent that she engage in prostitution, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a). We affirm. The victim in this ease was a thirteen-year-old girl who lived in an apartment with her mother in Mesa, Arizona. Since she is a juvenile, she will be referred to by the in

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ No. 06-2784 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PERNELL C. STARKS, Defendant-Appellant. ____________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

ORDER KYLE, District Judge. The above-entitled matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John M. Mason dated April 6, 2000. No objections have been filed to that Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted. Based upon the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and all of the files, records and pr