United States v. Flores, 03-20805 (2005)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 03-20805
Visitors: 95
Filed: Jun. 28, 2005
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 28, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk _ No. 03-20805 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. DENNIS SONGALIA FLORES Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to vacate this cour
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 28, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk _ No. 03-20805 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. DENNIS SONGALIA FLORES Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston - Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to vacate this court..
More
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 28, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk ______________________ No. 03-20805 ______________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. DENNIS SONGALIA FLORES Defendant - Appellant --------------------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston ---------------------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to vacate this court’s order of February 20, 2004, is GRANTED. IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to remand case for re-sentencing is GRANTED. 1 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. 1 2
Source: CourtListener
