May 13, 2026, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Unpublished decisions

  • United States v. Guardado Zepeda, 25-40545, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Engelhardt, Ramirez) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Scroggins v. City of Shreveport, 25-30695, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), civil
    • Affirming dismissal of plaintiff’s claims, with no description of nature of claims or issues on appeal.
  • United States v. Vargas, 25-50674, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Duncan, Douglas) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • United States v. Nunes, 25-11180, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Engelhardt, Ramirez) (no oral argument), criminal, supervised release, sentencing
    • Affirming supervised release term of unconditional ban on contact with minors.
    • At issue was whether the district court plainly erred in imposing, as part of a new 10-year supervised release term following revocation, an unconditional ban on contact with minors — specifically, whether the condition was insufficiently narrowly tailored to balance the defendant’s liberty interest in associating with minors against the government’s interest in protecting the public under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)(2) and United States v. Weatherton, 567 F.3d 149 (5th Cir. 2009).
    • Although the issue may be “subject to reasonable dispute,” the court held that Nunes failed to show the district court “clearly or obviously erred” under existing precedent and therefore did not establish plain error. The sentence was affirmed.
  • United States v. Mujica-Rojas, 25-50651, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Graves, Oldham) (no oral argument), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.