United States v. Lucero, No. 22-2018 (10th Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Appellate Case: 22-2018 Document: 010110831195 Date Filed: 03/22/2023 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit March 22, 2023 Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 22-2018 (D.C. No. 2:19-CR-00138-KG-1) (D. N.M.) v. GABRIEL MANUEL LUCERO, Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before PHILLIPS, MURPHY, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ This matter is before us on the parties’ Joint Motion to Vacate Oral Argument, Vacate Judgment, and Remand for Further Proceedings. Upon careful consideration, the joint motion is GRANTED as follows. The March 23, 2023 oral argument in this matter is VACATED, and all counsel are excused from attendance. This matter is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to (1) vacate its judgment and sentence, (2) consider whether the United States’ concession regarding the invalidity of the state cellphone search * In light of the parties’ joint motion, oral argument is not necessary, and this matter is submitted on the briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 22-2018 Document: 010110831195 Date Filed: 03/22/2023 Page: 2 warrant affects the district court’s ruling that the 67-day delay in obtaining the federal search warrant was reasonable, and (3) conduct any other proceedings that it deems necessary or advisable to bring this case to a conclusion. The Clerk shall issue the mandate forthwith. Entered for the Court, Per Curiam 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.