Articles Posted in Court Decisions

by

After reviewing some of my earlier postings over the years and their corresponding comments, it became clear that many readers from that time were accessing  on a regular basis the Opinion Summaries that were being posted  on the Criminal Law Library Blog, prior to its initial closing in 2012. On the basis of that finding it became obvious that reintroducing some form of Opinion Summaries in the newly reopened  Criminal Law Library Blog should at least be considered seriously. After consulting with the Justia Staff everyone  agreed that it was appropriate to reintroduce  opinion summaries to the Criminal Law Library Blog in the form of  Opinion Summaries Published by Justia. The plan is to post opinion summaries, under corresponding areas of law, weekly whenever possible in order to keep blog readers updated.

During this past week (week of July 29,2022) we have received listings of 43 Constitutional Law summaries,  56 Criminal Law Summaries, and 1 White Collar Law case summary.  To gain access to these case summaries, click on the corresponding links below:

Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries.

Continue reading

by

This Summer after reviewing some of my earlier postings over the years and their corresponding comments, it became clear that many readers from that time were accessing  on a regular basis the Opinion Summaries that were being posted  on the Criminal Law Library Blog, prior to its initial closing in 2012. On the basis of that finding it became obvious that reintroducing some form of Opinion Summaries in the newly reopened  Criminal Law Library Blog should at least be considered seriously. After consulting with the Justia Staff everyone  agreed that it was appropriate to reintroduce  opinion summaries to the Criminal Law Library Blog in the form of  Opinion Summaries Published by Justia. The plan is to post opinion summaries weekly whenever possible in order to keep blog readers updated.

Taking advantage of  improvements in the new software Justia began using after 2012, it became possible to have links contained within each  post accessible on one screen page for added convenience to the reader. The week of the posting is prominently displayed, as noted below,  followed by a brief  statement and by the links to the relevant areas of law.

As we further develop this format in the coming weeks, it is expected that links to additional areas of law may sometimes be added– provided they keep within the confines of the scope of the Criminal Law Library Blog.  Since many of the categories of Opinion Summaries  Justia publishes will always be outside the scope of the Criminal Law Library Blog, they will not be included in the selected  opinion summaries posted here.  For those interested in gaining access to additional listings, each posting of Selected Opinion Summaries Published by Justia will contain a link to the complete listings of Justia Opinion Summaries.

Continue reading

by

Upon his retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court on June 30, 2022. Justice Breyer will be receiving a number of awards including the following for his distinguished service while on the Court:

The American Bar Association (ABA) has announced that it will be  honoring  the Honorable Stephen G. Breyer its 2022 Medal, the Association’s highest honor at the ABA’s Annual Meeting in August 2022. The ABA announcement highlights Justice Breyer’s extraordinary career, his efforts to defend the rule of law, his commitment to judicial independence, and his long involvement with the Association. It also mentions that “[Breyer] has written more than 525 Opinions  as a Supreme Court Justice…”.

Justice Breyer will also be receiving the 2022  Thomas Jefferson Medal in Law. This Award is sponsored jointly by the University of Virginia and the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. “Thomas Jefferson Foundation Medals are awarded each year to recognize the achievements of those who embrace endeavors in which Jefferson — author of the Declaration of Independence, third U.S. president and founder of the University of Virginia-excelled and held in high regard”.

Continue reading

by

No. 21–429. Argued April 27, 2022—Decided June 29, 2022

Castro-Huerta was convicted of child neglect in Oklahoma state court. The Supreme Court subsequently held that the Creek Nation’s eastern Oklahoma reservation was never properly disestablished and remained “Indian country.” Castro-Huerta then argued that the federal government had exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute him (a non-Indian) for a crime committed against his stepdaughter (Cherokee Indian) in Tulsa (Indian country). The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals vacated his conviction.

The Supreme Court reversed. The federal government and the state have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indians against Indians in Indian country. States have jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed in Indian country unless preempted either under ordinary preemption principles, or when the exercise of state jurisdiction would unlawfully infringe on tribal self-government. Neither preempts state jurisdiction in this case.

Continue reading

by

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
March 21-25, 2011.

United States First Circuit, 03/22/2011
US v. Werra, No. 09-1593
Conviction and sentencing of defendant is reversed because stop-and-frisk conducted on him after law enforcement officers forced their way into a house occupied by a group of unrelated individuals to execute an arrest warrant violated the Fourth Amendment rights of defendant, where he was not the subject of the warrant.

United States Fourth Circuit, 03/25/2011
US v. Masciandaro, No. 09-4839
Conviction and sentencing of defendant for carrying or possessing a loaded handgun in a motor vehicle, under 36 C.F.R. section 2.4(b), is affirmed where the general federal savings statute, 1 U.S.C. Section 109, denies defendants an automatic entitlement to the benefit of post-arrest changes in the law.

United States Ninth Circuit, 03/21/2011
Smith v. Almada, No. 09-55334
In an appeals arising out of the arrest and trial of the appellant for arson, summary judgment in favor of the appellee is affirmed where failure to disclose evidence during criminal trial did not prejudice appellant.
Continue reading

by

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
November 8-12 2010.

United States First Circuit, 11/12/2010
Freedom from Religion Found. v. Hanover Sch. Dist., No. 09-2473
In plaintiffs’ suit seeking a declaration that the federal Pledge statute and the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in New Hampshire’s public schools violates various provisions of the U.S. Constitution, the New Hampshire Constitution, and federal and state law, district court’s dismissal of all of plaintiffs’ federal claims on their merits is affirmed as the New Hampshire School Patriot Act and the voluntary, teacher-led recitation of the Pledge by the state’s public school students do not violate the Constitution. .

United States Sixth Circuit, 11/09/2010
McCarthy v. City of Cleveland, No. 09-4149
In plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against the City of Cleveland, claiming that the city’s decision to enforce its traffic camera ordinance against drivers who lease their cars constituted an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation because the ordinance originally did not provide for lessee liability, district court’s dismissal of the suit for failure to state a cause of action under the Takings Clause of either the United States or Ohio Constitution is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) plaintiffs have failed to plead a cause of action under the Takings Clause as the challenged ordinance does not seize or otherwise impair an identifiable fund of money; but 2) the district court’s judgment on plaintiffs’ state law claims is reversed and remanded as the district court did not analyze plaintiffs’ claim which asserted that the city’s enforcement of the traffic camera ordinance unjustly enriched the city. .

United States Sixth Circuit, 11/09/2010
Sykes v. Anderson, No. 08-2088
In plaintiffs’ 42 U.S.C. section 1983 actions against several police officers, asserting claims of false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and denial of due process, and against the City of Detroit claiming that the city failed to respond to citizen complaints and that it failed to train and supervise its employees, following their overturned convictions for state crimes of “Larceny by Conversion” and “False Report of a Felony,” jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs on their claims against two police officers and award of over $2.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages is affirmed in part and remanded in part where: 1) defendants’ qualified immunity claim is waived as their failure to make a pre-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(a) on the grounds of qualified immunity precluded them from making a post-verdict motion under Rule 50(b) on that ground; 2) district court’s judgment as to plaintiffs’ claim of false arrest is affirmed because probable cause was lacking at the time the officer submitted a warrant application; 3) judgment against the defendants as to the plaintiffs’ claims for malicious prosecution is affirmed as the record contains ample evidence that the officer influenced or participated in the ultimate decision to prosecute plaintiffs by way of his knowing misstatements to the prosecutor; 4) judgment against the defendants as to the plaintiffs’ due-process claims is affirmed; 5) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for a new trial; and 6) because the district court failed to articulate a basis for its denial of the defendants’ motion for remittitur, the matter is remanded for the sole purpose of having the district court explain its reasons for denying remittitur Continue reading

by

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
November 8-12 2010.

United States Fourth Circuit, 11/12/2010
US v. Ide, No. 09-4833
District court’s grant of government’s petition to revoke defendant’s term of supervised release originally imposed in May 2002 as part of his sentence on a federal charge, claiming that defendant’s commission of an additional state offense, along with his failure to file monthly reports, violated the conditions of his supervised release, is affirmed as, under the circumstances, a defendant’s supervised release term is tolled under 18 U.S.C. section 3624(e) during the period that he spent in pretrial detention awaiting trial on the state charge for which he later was convicted. ..

United States Fifth Circuit, 11/09/2010
US v. Jackson, No. 09-10850
Defendant’s conviction and sentence, following a jury trial, for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine, are vacated where certain notebooks introduced into evidence were not sufficiently authenticated, the error violated defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause, and the error was not harmless.

United States Fifth Circuit, 11/09/2010
US v. Flores-Gallo, No. 09-40882
Defendant’s sentence for unlawful reentry into the U.S. is affirmed where the district court properly found that defendant’s prior Kansas aggravated battery offense was a “crime of violence” for sentencing purposes and imposed an enhancement accordingly.
Continue reading

by

To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
October 11-15 2010.

United States First Circuit, 10/11/2010
US v. Brown
Defendant’s conviction for possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute is affirmed where: 1) although the district court’s factual findings and the inferences made from those findings, which formed the basis of its conclusion that reasonable suspicion existed to stop a car, are not compelled by the record or by the facts, both are nonetheless reasonable and therefore pass constitutional muster; 2) the affirmance of the district court’s finding that the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the car forecloses the need to address defendant’s challenge to the district court’s alternate conclusion that the car was not seized when the officers first approached; and 3) there was no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence without an evidentiary hearing.

United States First Circuit, 10/14/2010
US v. Kinsella
Conviction of defendant for conspiring to possess and distribute oxycodone, possessing oxycodone with intent to distribute, and willfully failing to appear in court as required, as well as a 97-month sentence, are affirmed where: 1) defendant’s claim of multiple instances of prosecutorial misconduct is rejected; and 2) the district judge did not clearly err in his drug-quantity calculations.

United States First Circuit, 10/15/2010
Statchen v. Palmer
In plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against police officers, claiming that they used excessive force in arresting him for public intoxication and in transporting him from a station house to jail, district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants on the basis of qualified immunity is affirmed as the district court had no basis for sending the case to a jury because plaintiff’s own deposition provided no evidence to indicate that the force exerted was unnecessary, or that a reasonable police officer would have thought otherwise. .
Continue reading

Contact Information
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

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

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2024, David Badertscher
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design