gang-affiliation

5 cases — ← All topics

Case Title Lower Court Docketed Status Flags Tags Question Presented
23-7827 Gianni Montay Minners v. United States Tenth Circuit 2024-06-28 Denied Response WaivedIFP 4th-amendment fourth-amendment gang-affiliation high-crime-area investigative-detention law-enforcement prior-gun-possession probable-cause reasonable-suspicion search-and-seizure Is an investigative detention reasonable when there are insufficient facts to conclude the individual is a gang member or the area is a high crime are…
22-6793 Robert Loya, Jr. v. United States Fifth Circuit 2023-02-15 Denied Response WaivedIFP criminal-law criminal-procedure drug-possession drug-trafficking evidence felon-in-possession gang-affiliation intent-to-distribute sentencing sufficiency-of-evidence Is there insufficient evidence to warrant a finding of guilty for Count 1: possessing with intent to distribute methamphetamine over 50 grams and Coun…
20-6942 Juan Jose Camarena v. United States Ninth Circuit 2021-01-26 Denied Response WaivedIFP 18-usc-3583 5th-amendment due-process fifth-amendment gang-affiliation liberty plain-error sentencing-conditions supervised-release vagueness Is this condition of supervised release a violation of the Fifth Amendment due process right against vague conditions of release and/or a greater depr…
20-6570 Brandon Bernard v. United States Fifth Circuit 2020-12-08 Denied IFP brady-disclosure brady-violation death-penalty gang-affiliation government-misconduct napue-claim napue-violation procedural-default section-2255 successive-habeas successive-petition Where government action prevented Petitioner from bringing his claims under Brady and Napue in his initial § 2255 motion, should a second-in-time moti…
20-5115 Gerson Serrano-Ramirez v. United States Sixth Circuit 2020-07-21 Denied Response WaivedIFP criminal-procedure criminal-trial due-process evidence evidence-rules federal-procedure gang-affiliation jury-instructions motion-to-sever sufficiency-of-evidence venue Whether the district court erred in its rulings that prevented the defendant from receiving a fair trial