United States v. Lozano-Cadena, 04-11171 (2005)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 04-11171
Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 08, 2005
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 8, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III _ Clerk No. 04-11171 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. JUAN LOZANO-CADENA also known as, Juan Guadalupe Lozano-Cadena Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas 3:04-CR-45-ALL-N - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that Appe
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 8, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III _ Clerk No. 04-11171 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. JUAN LOZANO-CADENA also known as, Juan Guadalupe Lozano-Cadena Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas 3:04-CR-45-ALL-N - Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that Appel..
More
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS April 8, 2005 FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III _____________________ Clerk No. 04-11171 _____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. JUAN LOZANO-CADENA also known as, Juan Guadalupe Lozano-Cadena Defendant - Appellant --------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas 3:04-CR-45-ALL-N --------------------- Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that Appellee’s unopposed motion to vacate sentence is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellee’s unopposed motion to remand to district court for resentencing is GRANTED. * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Source: CourtListener
