History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Castaneda-Barrientos
448 F.3d 731
5th Cir.
2004
Check Treatment
Docket
PER CURIAM:*
PER CURIAM:*
Notes

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan Belen CASTANEDA-BARRIENTOS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-51087

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Aug. 18, 2004.

878

Conference Calendar.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr, Assistant U.S. Attorney, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Judy Fulmer Madewell, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Juan Belen Castaneda-Barrientos concedes that the arguments raised are foreclosed by circuit precedent but seeks to preserve them for further review. The Government has moved for summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee‘s brief. The motion is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald David COLONE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-41670

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Aug. 18, 2004.

Conference Calendar.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

Michelle S. Englade, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Beaumont, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Ronald David Colone, Beaumont, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

PER CURIAM:*

Counsel appointed to represent Ronald David Colone (“Colone“) has requested

Notes

*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Castaneda-Barrientos
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date Published: Aug 18, 2004
Citation: 448 F.3d 731
Docket Number: 03-51087
Court Abbreviation: 5th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.