Criminal Law Library Blog

To view these cases distributed by Findlaw.com you must first sign in to Findlaw.com. "Findlaw summaries [may] include opoinions that have not yet been released for publication and may be subject to modification, correction or withdrawl.

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 24, 2008
Davignon v. Hodgson , No. 06-1191
In an action involving allegations that a sheriff's act of suspending several correctional officers from their jobs was in retaliation for First Amendment activities, judgment and jury award for plaintiffs is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court erroneously concluded, as a matter of law, that the First Amendment protected the plaintiffs' speech; 2) no reasonable jury could have found that plaintiffs' punishments were in retaliation for their exercise of First Amendment rights; 3) the jury's section 1983 individual capacity findings were inconsistent with findings in favor of plaintiffs on other claims; 4) the district court erroneously instructed the jury regarding the First Amendment claims; and 5) the district court erred in its evidentiary rulings and awarded excessive fees. .

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, April 22, 2008
Benzman v. Whitman , No. 06-1166, 06-1346, 06-1454
An order denying in part and granting in part defendants' motions to dismiss claims for damages against former EPA administrator, and for other relief against EPA for alleged constitutional and statutory violations in the aftermath of the 9/11 disaster, is reversed in part where the district court improperly denied defendants' motion to dismiss: 1) claims of Fifth Amendment substantive due process violations to be free from government-created health risk; and 2) constitutional claims under the Administrative Procedure Act. .

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, April 22, 2008
Ali v. Mukasey , No. 07-1186
Where a removable alien does not challenge on legal or constitutional grounds a decision to place him/her in removal proceedings, the circuit court lacks jurisdiction to consider a petition for relief.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 24, 2008
US v. Ogba , No. 06-10519
Defendants' convictions and sentences resulting from a scheme involving billing Medicare for false prescriptions for wheelchairs are affirmed in part over claims of error regarding: 1) whether the circuit court abused its discretion in refusing to provide defendants with a copy of a colloquy between a recruiter and the judge; 2) a refusal to admit an e-mail about the recruiter into evidence; 3) cumulative errors regarding the recruiter's testimony; 4) a Confrontation Clause claim, and whether any such error was harmless; 5) a deliberate ignorance instruction; 6) whether the indictment was void; and 7) whether the indictment failed to allege an offense enumerated in the Constitution. One defendant's sentence is reversed and remanded based on a claim that his convictions under the health care fraud and illegal remuneration statutes were multiplicitous and violated double jeopardy. .

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 23, 2008
Giesse v. Sec'y of Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs., No. 06-4497
In a suit seeking damages subsequent to an alleged wrongful termination of medical care, grant of motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's claims are not appeals from an administrative determination since plaintiff sought damages and not reinstatement of services; 2) there was no due process violation since plaintiff does not have a vested property interest in 100 days of post-hospital extended care; and 3) there is no implied right of action as the Medicare Act has provided a mechanism to address claims of wrongful denials of benefits and provided a remedy in the form of reinstatement of care. .

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 23, 2008
Nuxoll v. Indian Praire Sch. Dist. #204, No. 08-1050
In a case brought by a high school student alleging defendants-school district and officials violated his right to free speech by forbidding him to make negative comments at school about homosexuality, denial of a preliminary injunction is reversed with directions to enter a preliminary injunction which is limited to the application of the school's rule to a T-shirt that recites "Be Happy, Not Gay". Plaintiff was not entitled to a preliminary injunction against the rule at issue, but the school failed to justify the ban of that particular legend, though the fuller record that will be compiled in further proceedings may cast the issue in a different light.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 24, 2008
Domka v. Portage County, Wisconsin, No. 07-2984
In a suit alleging plaintiff had constitutionally protected liberty interests in his Huber privileges and the Home Detention Program (HDP) and that he was deprived of these without the requisite procedural due process, summary judgment defendant is affirmed where: 1) the plea agreement between plaintiff and the prosecutor did not give rise to a "legitimate entitlement" in the programs; 2) there was no due process violation since plaintiff waived his due process protections when he agreed to participate in the program, but the court reserves the question of whether a prisoner has a liberty interest in a home detention program; and 3) failure to seek a court order for the suspension of plaintiff's Huber privileges did not violate due process since failure to comply with state procedural rules does not violate the federal constitution.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 24, 2008
Koger v. Bryan, No. 05-1904
In a suit against prison officials claiming that failure to accommodate his religious-based dietary request was a violation of his rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), and the First and Fourteenth Amendments, summary judgment for defendants and other rulings are reversed and remanded for further proceedings where: 1) the record established that prison officials violated plaintiff's rights as secured under RLUIPA, and judgment for plaintiff on his claim brought under that statute was warranted; and 2) the district court abused its discretion in failing to exercise the discretion available to it under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 21, 2008
Seven Up Pete Venture v. Schweitzer, No. 06-35384
Dismissal of a state takings claims arising out of a state ban on open-pit mining for gold or silver by the cyanide heap leaching process is affirmed where the Eleventh Amendment bars a reverse condemnation action brought in federal court against state officers in their official capacities.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 24, 2008
US v. Shi, No. 06-10389
A foreign national who forcibly seizes control of a foreign vessel in international waters may be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. when such vessel is intercepted by federal authorities. Foreign national's conviction and sentence for seizing control over a ship by force, and performing an act of violence likely to endanger the safety of the ship, is affirmed over challenges regarding: 1) the district court's jurisdiction; 2) the sufficiency of the indictment; 3) the admissibility of a statement to an agent; 4) the admissibility of letters seized from defendant's bunk; and 5) the constitutionality of his sentence.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 25, 2008
Truth v. Kent Sch. Dist., No. 04-35876
In an action alleging Equal Access Act and constitutional violations brought against a school district and other defendants arising from plaintiff's attempt to form a student Bible study club at a high school, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where: 1) although the district did not violate the Act or plaintiff's First Amendment rights by applying its non-discrimination policy to require plaintiff to remove its general membership provision; nevertheless, 2) to the extent plaintiff alleged the district violated the Act or the First Amendment by refusing to provide an exemption to its non-discrimination policy—based on plaintiff's religion or the content of its speech summary judgment was error. (Superseding opinion)

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 23, 2008
York v. City of Las Cruces, No. No. 07-2150
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging violations of plaintiff's First and Fourth Amendment claims, denial of qualified immunity for defendants-police officers is affirmed where: 1) accepting plaintiff's version of events as true, a fact finder could easily find constitutional violations; 2) plaintiff's right not to be arrested for saying an expletive under the circumstances was clearly established; and 3) defendants waived a claim that officers had probable cause to believe that plaintiff had committed the offense of disturbing the peace based on his discussion with an officer about the legality of his conduct.

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 22, 2008
Agripost, LLC v. Miami-Dade County, Florida , No. 05-16499
In an action involving governmental regulatory taking claims wherein a state court previously ruled that plaintiff had no property interest protected by state or federal constitution, summary judgment for defendant premised on res judicata and collateral estoppel is affirmed where: 1) nothing in the state court litigation rendered plaintiff's opportunity to make its case insufficiently "full and fair"; and 2) a state court of competent jurisdiction already ruled that plaintiff had no compensable property interest.

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 23, 2008
Florida Ass'n of Prof'l Lobbyists Inc. v. Div. of Legislative Info. Serv. of the Florida Office of Legislative Serv. , No. 07-10435
In a case assessing the constitutionality of a Florida legislation which regulates legislative and executive lobbying in Florida, a finding of no contravention to the federal constitution is affirmed over claims that the Act's provision banning expenditures and its compensation reporting provisions were unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. Furthermore, whether the underlying Act violates Florida's separation of powers doctrine or infringes the Florida Supreme Court's jurisdiction are certified to the Florida Supreme Court, as these questions are solely issues of state law that should be decided by the Florida Supreme Court.

Supreme Court of California, April 24, 2008
Manta Mgmt. v. San Bernardino , No. S144492
In a case where plaintiff-adult business owner sought monetary damages against defendant-city for lost profits caused by a preliminary injunction and a stay pending appeal that the city had sought, and that state courts had issued, a judgment for plaintiff is reversed and remanded for further proceedings where: 1) the underlying courts' intervening exercise of independent judgment in issuing the preliminary injunction and stay broke the chain of causation for purposes of 42 U.S.C. section 1983 liability, in the absence of evidence that defendant materially misled or pressured the judges who were expected to exercise independent judgment; and 2) a remand was proper as the parties disputed whether material misrepresentations were made to the judges at issue. ..

California Appellate Districts, April 23, 2008
People v. Jacinto , No. A117076
In a case wherein a material defense witness, incarcerated and facing deportation, was served with a subpoena but immediately deported upon completion of his sentence, grant of defendant's motion to dismiss the information is reversed where the trial court erroneously concluded that the sheriff's department's act of releasing the witness to federal custody was state action