USA v. Saul Solis-Arroyo

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-50566 Affirmed ] Judge: ECP , Judge: JWE , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 05/07/2014 for Appellant Saul Solis-Arroyo; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellee USA [7514643-2]; denying motion to extend time to file appellee's brief filed by Appellee USA [7514643-3] [13-50566]

Download PDF
Case: 13-50566 Document: 00512598144 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-50566 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 16, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. SAUL SOLIS-ARROYO, also known as Arnulfo Arroyo, also known as Raul Solis, also known as Mario Jaramillo, also known as Jaime Palo, also known as Alcadio Gamero, also known as Arnulfo Benitez, also known as Saul Solis, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:13-CR-197-1 Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Saul Solis-Arroyo raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 562-63 (5th Cir. 2008), which rejected the argument that fast track programs create unwarranted disparities between defendants in districts that have the programs and defendants in districts that do not have such 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-50566 Document: 00512598144 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 No. 13-50566 programs. Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, its alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?