Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Mark Rodriguez, 18-50877 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 18-50877 Visitors: 57
Filed: Dec. 31, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Case: 18-50877 Document: 00514777419 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/31/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-50877 FILED Summary Calendar December 31, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. MARK ANTHONY RODRIGUEZ, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:18-CR-572-1 Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
More
Case: 18-50877 Document: 00514777419 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/31/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-50877 FILED Summary Calendar December 31, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. MARK ANTHONY RODRIGUEZ, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:18-CR-572-1 Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mark Anthony Rodriguez appeals from the order of the district court denying his motion to revoke the magistrate judge’s pretrial detention order. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 9 requires that the “district court must state in writing, or orally on the record, the reasons for an order regarding the release or detention of a defendant in a criminal case.” Fed. R. App. P. 9(a)(1). In the instant case, there was no hearing by the district court and therefore no * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 18-50877 Document: 00514777419 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/31/2018 No. 18-50877 opportunity for an oral statement. The written statement of the order did not include reasons for the detention of the defendant. Accordingly, we REMAND to the district court for the limited purpose of providing the reasons for the order in writing. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer