The Southern District of West Virginia offers a database of opinions starting in the year 2001, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search to the right or sort using the drop-downs below.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
On May 7, 2026, the court held a sentencing hearing for Defendant Cornell Cordon. At the hearing, the parties presented opposing arguments regarding the appropriate base offense level for the calculation of Defendant’s advisory Guidelines range. For the reasons that follow, I find that Defendant’s prior criminal conviction establishes him as a Tier III sex offender under the advisory Guidelines.
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Pending are Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reopen Civil Action, [ECF 1357], and Motion to Enforce Settlement, [ECF 1359], both filed July 25, 2025, and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider, [ECF 1365], filed August 11, 2025. The motions were filed by a discrete subset of the Plaintiffs in the style, namely, Bryan Stafford, on behalf of the estate of Thomas Fleenor, Jr., Jonathan Crabtree, and Gary Toler (“Plaintiffs”).1 The matters are ready for adjudication.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Pending is Appellant Angelika Weiss' -- both individually and in her capacity of Executor of the Estate of Wilson Buckingham -- Appeal of the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina's (the "Bankruptcy Court") Order Denying Wilson Buckingham and Angelika Weiss' Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d) [ECF 1], filed March 11, 2024.1 On June 10, 2024, Ms. Weiss filed her brief in support of her appeal. [ECF 7]. On July 10, 2024, Appellee Bestwall, LLC ("Bestwall"), responded in opposition [ECF 13], to which Ms. Weiss replied [ECF 15] on July 24, 2024.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Pending are Motions for Summary Judgment by Defendant Troy Carter [ECF 200], filed November 20, 2025, as well as by Defendant Aaron Williams [ECF 202] and Defendant Jeremy Richmond [ECF 204], both filed November 21, 2025. Plaintiff Anthony Brown (“Plaintiff”) responded to each motion [ECF 209–211], to which Defendants Carter, Williams, and Richmond filed their respective replies [ECF 215; ECF 214; ECF 216]. Also pending is Plaintiff Anthony Brown’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF 206], filed November 21, 2025. Defendants Carter, Williams, and Richmond responded in opposition [ECF 208; ECF 212; ECF 213], to which Plaintiff did not reply. Also pending are additional motions identified and adjudicated at the conclusion. The matters are ready for adjudication.
Memorandum Opiniion And Order
Pending before the court is Petitioner Miguel Antonio Dominguez Izaguirre’s Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. [ECF No. 1]. For the reasons discussed below, the Petition is GRANTED.
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Antiseptic judicial rhetoric cannot do justice to what is happening. Across the interior of the United States, agents of the federal government—masked, anonymous, armed with military weapons, operating from unmarked vehicles, acting without warrants of any kind—are seizing persons for civil immigration violations and imprisoning them without any semblance of due process. The systematic character of this practice and its deliberate elimination of every structural feature that distinguishes constitutional authority from raw force place it beyond the reach of ordinary legal description. It is an assault on the constitutional order. It is what the Fourth Amendment was written to prevent. It is what the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment forbids.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
The husband and wife before this court are charged with civil violations of our country's immigration laws. Civil. Not criminal.1 That distinction is not a technicality or a formality. It is the line the law draws between regulation and punishment. Yet these two working parents appear in unmistakable prison garb.2 They wear orange jumpsuits, are shackled, and are restrained in heavy chains. They have been kept away from their children, forced to languish in detention hundreds of miles away from where they live and work. They have been confined for days alongside persons accused of or convicted of crimes. They are held without any custody determination or bond hearing. This is not what civil enforcement looks like in a humane system of government under law.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
The law is clear: all persons present within our country are entitled to due process. The plain text of our Constitution says this explicitly.
Memorandum Opinion And Order
This case does not arise in isolation.
The court is aware that similar seizures and detentions are occurring increasingly across the country.1 Individuals are stopped during ordinary civilian activity, taken into custody for civil immigration purposes, and confined in local jails without prompt hearings, without individualized findings, and often far from counsel, family, or community. That broader context matters, especially when assessing constitutional risk.1
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Pending is Defendant Nathaniel Wilburn’s Motion to Suppress, filed September 9, 2025. [ECF 24]. The Government responded on October 1, 2025. [ECF 32]. Mr. Wilburn replied on October 8, 2025. [ECF 33]. On October 22, 2025, the Court held an evidentiary hearing. [ECF 43]. Mr. Wilburn and Federal Public Defender Wesley P. Page appeared. Also present was Assistant United States Attorney Brian D. Parsons. The Court heard testimony from three witnesses, Corporal Shane Thompson (“Cpl. Thompson”) with the West Virginia State Police, Sergeant Gary Epling (“Sgt. Epling”) with the Raleigh County Sheriff’s Office, and Defendant Nathaniel Wilburn.