Designated for publication
- Sustaita-Cordova v. Garland, 23-60095, petition for review of BIA order
- Higginson, J. (Higginbotham, Higginson, Duncan), immigration
- Denying Mexican citizen’s petition for review of BIA order dismissing appeal of IJ’s denial of applications for cancelation of removal and voluntary departure; rejecting arguments “that (1) the agency erred in determining he was ineligible for cancellation because he had not made the required exceptional-hardship and moral-character showings; (2) the BIA abused its discretion by denying his motion for administrative closure or a continuance; (3) the BIA abused its discretion by ignoring his request for a remand to pursue a waiver of inadmissibility before the IJ; and (4) the BIA erred in rejecting his contention that his removal proceedings should be terminated due to a deficient Notice to Appear.”
- U.S. v. Hinds County Board of Supervisors, 22-60203, c/w 22-60301, c/w 22-60332, c/w 22-60527, c/w 22-60597, appeal from S.D. Miss.
- Clement, J. (Clement, Southwick, by quorum), Southwick, J., concurring; consent decree
- Affirming in part and reversing in part district court’s denial of motion to terminate consent decree regarding county’s jails in all respects, except to find that provisions regarding PREA-related constitutional violations were overly broad and not supported by the record, and to find that the scope of an ordered receivership was too broad insofar as it gave the receiver authority over budgetary matters.
- Judge Southwick concurred to “address[] the validity of two judges’ hearing the oral argument and then deciding the appeal” when a third judge recused on the day before oral argument. Reviewing the historical background of the three-judge requirement, he concluded, “Because the initial assignment was to a three-judge panel, it is proper after a recusal for a two-judge quorum of that panel to decide this case.”
Unpublished
- U.S. v. Garrett, 24-10171, appeal from N.D. Tex.
- per curiam (King, Southwick, Engelhardt), criminal, guilty plea
- Affirming guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, holding that there was sufficient factual basis for the plea.
- U.S. v. Doblado-Padilla, 24-10272, appeal from N.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Higginbotham, Jones, Oldham), criminal, sentencing
- Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
- U.S. v. Bueno, 23-11054, appeal from N.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Haynes, Higginson, Douglas), criminal, sentencing, sufficiency of evidence
- Affirming conviction and 240-month sentence for transfer of obscene material to a minor and enticement and attempted enticement of a minor.
- U.S. v. Jones, 23-11152, appeal from N.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Haynes, Higginson, Douglas), criminal
- Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
- U.S. v. Solorio-Diaz, 23-11158, appeal from N.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Richman, Douglas, Ramirez), criminal
- Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
- U.S. v. Moore, 23-30444, appeal from E.D. La.
- per curiam (King, Stewart, Higginson), criminal, sentencing
- Affirming 330-month sentence on conviction of attempted Hobbs Act robbery, conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute marijuana, using firearms in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, and conspiracy to possess firearms in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime.
- U.S. v. Perez-Perez, 24-40316, appeal from E.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, sentence reduction
- Affirming denial of motion for sentence reduction.
- U.S. v. Farley, 24-40384, appeal from S.D. Tex.
- per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal
- Affirming conviction for possession of ammunition by a felon.
- Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., 24-60025, appeal from N.D. Miss.
- per curiam (Higginbotham, Stewart, Haynes), personal tort, diversity jurisdiction
- Remanding to the district court to determine the existence of diversity jurisdiction, where the record only showed the parties’ state of residence and not their state of citizenship.
Take the Fifth 