United States v. Guzman, 06-40650 (2007)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 06-40650
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jan. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Fifth Circuit FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D _ January 17, 2007 No. 06-40650 _ Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. ENRIQUE GUZMAN Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria - Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to summarily affirm the judgm
Summary: United States Court of Appeals IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Fifth Circuit FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D _ January 17, 2007 No. 06-40650 _ Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. ENRIQUE GUZMAN Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria - Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to summarily affirm the judgme..
More
United States Court of Appeals IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Fifth Circuit FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT F I L E D _____________________ January 17, 2007 No. 06-40650 _____________________ Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. ENRIQUE GUZMAN Defendant - Appellant --------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria --------------------- Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* IT IS ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to summarily affirm the judgment in part is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to vacate the judgment in part is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to remand case for resentencing in light of Lopez v. Gonzales is * 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. GRANTED.
Source: CourtListener
