Carlos F. Lucero
How Judge Lucero decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He reads statutory text according to its plain terms and gives effect to every word, declining to look behind clear language for a purpose that would contradict it -- and he follows that plain meaning even to results the drafters may not have foreseen.
“Section 848(q) employs clear and precise language, admitting of no ambiguity and leaving no room for interpretation.”
In constitutional cases he grounds his reasoning in first principles of liberty, due process, and equal protection, framing the specific dispute as an application of enduring guarantees rather than a narrow technical question.
“We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right to marry, establish a family, raise children, and enjoy the full protection of a state's marital laws.”
Procedural preferences
He enforces statutory jurisdictional and administrative-channeling requirements strictly: a claim that arises under a federal benefits or Medicare scheme cannot bypass the required agency process merely by being recast as a constitutional claim, and a suit filed under the wrong jurisdictional statute must be dismissed rather than decided on the merits.
“BVH may not avoid the administrative channeling provisions of 42 U.S.C. 405(g) and (h) merely by couching its claims in constitutional terms.”
He follows binding circuit precedent even when he is openly sympathetic to the losing party, holding that one panel cannot overrule another and that relief from a settled rule must come from the en banc court or a higher court -- not from a panel's disagreement with the rule.
“We cannot overrule the judgment of another panel of this court. We are bound by the precedent of prior panels absent en banc reconsideration or a superseding contrary decision by the Supreme Court.”
Cautions
He is protective of Fourth Amendment limits on police force, holding that continuing to use force -- such as repeated tasering -- on a suspect who has already been subdued is excessive and, where prior cases put officers on notice, not shielded by qualified immunity.
“the officers' repeated tasering of Perea after he was subdued constituted excessive force, and that it was clearly established at the time of the taserings that such conduct was unconstitutional.”
He treats speech about the public administration of justice -- including a citizen's plea in a criminal sentencing -- as a matter of public concern that the First Amendment protects, even when the speaker also has a personal stake and even when the message is unpopular with a government employer.
“sentencing proceedings are at the core of the public administration of justice, and are therefore quintessentially matters of public concern.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“we AFFIRM the district court's dismissal of BVH's action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
“we dismiss the appeal as to the factual challenges, and exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291, we otherwise affirm the district court's order.”
“we reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand for further proceedings.”
“We reverse the district court's grant of the motion to dismiss and remand for further proceedings.”
“we reverse and remand to the district court for further proceedings.”
Put Judge Lucero's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Lucero actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Lucero's own signed orders and cites them.