Cases

OPINION AND ORDER AIDA M. DELGADO-COLÓN, Chief Judge. On February 26, 2014, defendant Carlos Barros-Villahermosa (“defendant”) was charged in a two-count indictment with one count of falsely impersonating an officer or employee of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 912, and one count of making a false statement, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. ECF No. 3. I. The Pen

OPINION AND ORDER AIDA M. DELGADO-COLÓN, Chief Judge. On February 26, 2014, defendant Carlos Barros-Villahermosa (“defendant”) was charged in a two-count indictment with (1) false personation of an U.S. officer or employee, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 912, and (2) making a false statement, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. ECF No. 3. I. The Pending Matter Cu

642 F.3d 56 (2011) Carlos BARROS-VILLAHERMOSA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES; United States Department of Homeland Security; United States Customs and Border Protection; Marcelino Borges; Mirella Couto; Dennis Meccanego; Jorge Muñiz; Jorge Pagán-Albino; Maria Palmer; Reynaldo Sánchez-Ruíz; Roberto Vizcarrondo, Defendants, Appellees, Jesús M. Torres-De León; José Muñiz, Defendants. No. 09-2614. <

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

PER CURIAM: Defendant’s sole point on appeal from his conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 173 is that the trial court improperly permitted the use of evidence of defendant’s prior convictions for impeachment. Defendant relies upon the line of cases following Luck v. United States, 121 U.S.App. D.C. 151, 348 F.2d 763 (1965). Since no object

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 21-1276 GABIEL LOZADA-MANZANO; CESAR LOZADA; BELKIS MANZANO, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Raúl M. Arias-Marxuach, U.S. District Jud

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Joel Diaz-Nieves (“Joel”) appeals from the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee the United States, dismissing his false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution claims. Co-plaintiffs, Joel’s parents, Saúl Diaz-Rodríguez and Aida Nieves-Pérez, and Joel’s brother, Giovanny Diaz-Nieves,

LIPEZ, Circuit Judge. Appellant Jorge Paret-Ruiz (“Paret”) was convicted and imprisoned for nearly four years on drug conspiracy charges that a previous panel of this court concluded were not supported by the evidence produced at his trial. See United States v. Paret-Ruiz, 567 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2009). The charges also led to Paret’s forfeiture of two trucks and a boat. Following

OPINION AND ORDER BRUCE J. McGIVERIN, United States Magistrate Judge. In this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), Joel Diaz-Nieves (“Joel Diaz”), his mother Aida Nieves-Perez (“Nieves”), his father Saul Diaz-Rodriguez (“Saul Diaz”), and his brother Giovanny Diaz-Nieves (Giovanny Diaz) (collectively, “plaintiffs”) sued the government for damages arising out of Joel Diaz’s arrest o

PER curiam : El 26 de noviembre de 1969 se formuló de-nuncia contra el apelante por alegados daños maliciosos contra la propiedad, Art. 511 del Código Penal, 33 L.P.R.A. see. 2061. El Tribunal de Distrito lo halló culpable, conde-nándolo a cumplir una pena de tres meses de cárcel y a pagar *274una multa de cien dólares. El acusado apeló al Tribunal Superior, solicitando l

AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC DANIEL R. DOMÍNGUEZ, District Judge. Pending before the Court are the following motions: (a) Motion for Summary Judgment; the Memorandum of Law in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment, and the Motion Submitting Exhibits filed by the defendant United States of America (hereinafter the “defendant” or the “Governme

ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT GEORGE Z. SINGAL, District Judge. Before the Court is the Government’s unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket # 7). As explained herein, the Court GRANTS the Government’s Motion. I. LEGAL STANDARD Summary judgment is proper where, on the record before the Court, it appears “that there is no genuine dispute as to any materi

*690 HOWARD, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff William Ríos-Piñeiro appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States in this Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) action. The United States Postal Service (“USPS”) terminated Rios’s employment contract after concluding that he had stol

OPINION AND ORDER GUSTAVO A. GELPÍ, District Judge. Plaintiff Jorge A. Paret-Ruiz (“Plaintiff’) brings this action against the United States of America (“USA”) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) (collectively “Defendants”) seeking damages for his arrest, prosecution and imprisonment. (See Docket No. 1 at ¶ 5.) Presently before the court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Docket No.

STEPHENSON, Circuit Judge. The primary issue on this appeal concerns the sufficiency of the evidence to support appellant’s conviction, by a jury, of possession of counterfeit United States federal reserve notes with intent to defraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472 (1970) .1 Appellant also asserts three other grounds for reversal which involve the

JUAN M. PEREZ-GIMENEZ, SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiffs Danny Dominguez and Elionai Fernandez sued Defendants Minerva Ramos ("ADA Ramos") and Dennis Morales Rodriguez ("Officer Morales") (collectively, "Defendants") for alleged violations of their rights under the Fourth Amendment.1 Docket No. 1. They specifically

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DAVID CASSIRER; THE ESTATE No. 19-55616 OF AVA CASSIRER; UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN D.C. No. DIEGO COUNTY, a California non- 2:05-cv-03459- profit corporation, JFW-E Plaintiffs-Appellants, OPINION v. THYSSEN-BORNEMISZA COLLECTION FOUNDATION, an agency or instrumentality of

ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT GEORGE Z. SINGAL, District Judge. ■ .Before the Court are the. cross-motions for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Dr. Malathy Sundaram (“Plaintiff’ or “Dr. Sundaram’’) and Defendants COVERYS, ProSelect Insurance Company (together with COVERYS, “ProSelect”), and Integrated Insurance Solutions (“Integrated” and, together with ProSelect, “Defendants”). For the reaso

OPINION BEA, Circuit Judge, with whom Judge CALLAHAN concurs. Judge IKUTA concurs except as to Sections Ill.C.l.iii.b and III.C.Liv: In 1939 Germany, as part of the “Aryan-ization” of the property of German Jews, Lilly Neubauer (“Lilly”) 1 was forced to “sell” a painting by C

OPINION AND ORDER JUAN M. PÉREZ-GIMÉNEZ, District Judge. Danny Dominguez and Elionai Fernandez are licensed bounty hunters who work for Speedy Bailbonds, a bail bond company located in New Jersey. They were required by their employer to locate and bring defendant Ricardo Rodriguez Tirado from Puerto Rico back to New Jersey after he failed to appear at a hearing and fled the jurisdiction.