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, August 25, 2008
US v. Edelen, No. 07-1189
Appeal of sentence for 126 months' imprisonment for one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base is dismissed where the appellate waiver, waiving defendant's right to file a direct appeal so long as the sentence imposed was within the applicable Guideline Sentencing Range or lower, was enforceable and valid. .

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Sanchez-Badillo, No. 051800, 052045, 052047
Convictions and sentences for conspiring to distribute heroin, cocaine, cocaine base, and marijuana are affirmed over claims of error that: 1) jury's conspiracy verdict was not supported by evidence; 2) trial court made sentencing errors; 3) evidence was insufficient to support jury's verdict against one of the defendants on weapons charges and prosecutorial misconduct entitles him to a new trial; and 4) trial judge made impermissible comments in the jury's presence and defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel.

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Yelaun, No. 07-1651
Conviction and sentence for federal fraud related offenses committed during a scheme to collect insurance payments for medical tests is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) certain trial testimony was admitted in error; 2) there was a variance between the indictment's count 43, which charged defendant with conspiracy to commit money laundering, and the proof at trial; and 3) the judged erred in calculating defendant's sentence according to two sentence enhancements.

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Carrasco, No. 061887, 061888
Convictions for possession of cocaine and heroin are vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court plainly misremembered its own ruling and the state of the docket; 2) admission of one defendant's confession to impeach him may have made the difference between his conviction and his acquittal; and 3) district court's reversal of its own ruling, with no consideration for the reliance of the parties and after other defendant had already testified, may have swayed jury to convict. District court's denial of motion to suppress the evidence seized after search of the boat is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) defendants did not consent to the search; and 2) the district court erred in its alternative determination that the search met the requirements of a border search. Denial of appellants' motions for judgment of acquittal is affirmed over claims of error that the jury did not have sufficient evidence before it to convict defendants. .

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Hernandez, No. 07-1828
In a matter of first impression concerning the application of section 4A1.1(d) of the federal sentencing guideline, sentence for conspiracy to distribute heroin is affirmed where: 1) defendant "committed the instant offense while under a[] criminal justice sentence"; and 2) the district court appropriately elevated his criminal history score by two points on that account.

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Whitley, No. 06-0131
In a criminal law matter, petition for review of decision denying rehearing is denied where the court declined to depart from the literal wording of the "except" clause of 18 U.S.C. section 924(c)(1)(A). .

U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Stein, No. 073042
Dismissal of indictment of thirteen former partners of the accounting firm KPMG for creating fraudulent tax shelters is affirmed where: 1) the government deprived defendants of their right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment by causing KPMG to place conditions on the advancement of legal fees to defendants, and to cap the fees and ultimately end them; 2) the government failed to cure the Sixth Amendment violation; and 3) no other remedy will return defendants to the status quo ante.
..
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Kozeny, No. 073107
Grant of motion to dismiss all but false statement charges related to violation of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is affirmed where the plain language of 18 U.S.C. section 3292, and the structure and content of the law by which it was enacted, require the government to apply for a suspension of the running of the statute of limitations before the limitations period expires. .

U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Leveto, No. 05-4753
Conviction for federal income tax fraud is affirmed where: 1) defendant had knowingly and voluntarily waived his Sixth Amendment right to counsel and, once properly waived, this right is no longer absolute; and 2) there was no reversible error in several rulings regarding a warrant and summons.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. King, No. 07-30649
Conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess cocaine with the intent to distribute and conspiracy to launder money are affirmed over claims that: 1) the sentencing court relied on a presumption that a sentence within the sentencing guidelines was reasonable; 2) statements by co-conspirators were inadmissible hearsay; and 3) tape-recorded conversations between defendant and his wife were privileged and therefore inadmissible.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
Ramirez v. Knoulton, No. 07-50785
In a suit alleging excessive force by defendant-police officer for shooting plaintiff during his arrest, denial of summary judgment to defendant is reversed where defendant acted reasonably in deciding to use deadly force, and no constitutional violation therefore occurred.

U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Salazar, No. 07-40683
Conviction and sentence for witness tampering are affirmed where: 1) conviction was based on sufficient evidence; 2) an objection to the application of a cross-reference to a sentencing guideline was waived; 3) the penalty provisions of the witness-tampering statute were correctly applied; and 4) the proper burden of proof was applied in determining sentence enhancements. .

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Brattain, No. 07-1594
A sentence for aggravated sexual abuse of a minor is vacated and remanded for resentencing where, contrary to the district court's conclusion, the district court's refusal to apply an enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. section 4B1.5(b) was error because defendant qualified as a repeat offender, and Congress explicitly revised the enhancement to apply to repeat-offenders who abuse only a single victim.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Hardin, No. 06-6277
Denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence is reversed and his conviction for drug- and firearm-related offenses is vacated where: 1) the circuit court leaves unanswered whether probable cause or "reason to believe" is the correct standard governing when officers may enter a residence to execute an arrest warrant; but 2) an apartment manager in this case was acting as an agent of the government, and officers' remaining information failed to establish even a reasonable belief that defendant was inside an apartment; and 3) thus, a search of the apartment violated defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, and all evidence obtained as a result should have been suppressed.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
Railey v. Webb, No. 06-5806
An order denying a 28 U.S.C. section 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus from a conviction for assault is affirmed over claims that judicial bias, ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and his invalid plea of guilty warranted reversal of the district court's decision.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Santillana, No. 06-1276
A sentence for using a firearm during, and in relation to, a drug trafficking offense is affirmed where: 1) defendant was not challenging the reasonableness of the sentence; and 2) the circuit court generally does not review a district court's decision not to depart downward, and no exception to that rule applied here. ..

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Payne, No. 07-5592
In a conviction for multiple counts involving drugs, firearms, violence and multiple murders, court order authorizing involuntary medication treatment plan designed to restore defendant's competency to stand trial is affirmed over claims of error that the district court erred in finding that the evidence offered at the hearing was sufficient to establish that the proposed treatment is substantially likely to restore defendant's competency.

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Childs, No. 071495, 071597
Convictions for conspiracy to commit murder for hire resulting death are affirmed over claims that the district court erred by: 1) denying defendant's Rule 29 motion for acquittal; 2) allowing witness to testify to an out-of-court statement made by indicted co-conspirator; 3) requiring one defendant to testify under a statutory grant of use immunity at his co-defendant's trial; 4) failing to order one defendant, over his attorney's objections, to submit to a pre-testimony interview by other defendant's attorney; and 5) denying one defendant's mistrial motion based on the government’s allegedly improper questioning of him at trial in violation of the Fifth Amendment. .

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
Tucker v. State of Tennessee, No. 06-6208
In civil rights suit alleging that city police discriminated against plaintiffs in violation of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to provide a qualified sign language interpreter or other such reasonable accommodations during their arrest following a domestic disturbance call, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant-government entities is affirmed where: 1) claim against county failed because plaintiff voluntarily served as an interpreter at the dispositional hearing on other plaintiffs' criminal charges; 2) the city police, in arresting plaintiffs, did not perform "service, program, or activity" to which ADA applied; 3) brief detention during post-arrest detention at jail was not a "service, activity, or program" under ADA; 4) plaintiffs failed to show any injury resulting from the use of the relay operator; 5) at arraignment, plaintiffs received the same benefits of an initial appearance under state law as those afforded to non-disabled persons despit! e unavailability of a sign language interpreter; and 6) plaintiff did not have standing to assert ADA claims related to dispositional hearing given that the charges were dropped against him and he did not participate in it. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Mikos, No. 06-2375, 06-2376, 06-2421
In a capital-murder case in which defendant killed his victim to prevent her from testifying about his Medicare fraud scheme, conviction and sentence are affirmed in part and remanded as to restitution where: 1) a premature seizure of guns owned by defendant during execution of a "sneak and peek" warrant did not require suppression of the guns as evidence; 2) defendant's right not to incriminate himself did not prevent the prosecutor from asking the jury to infer guilt based on the fact that one of his guns went missing; 3) expert testimony by an FBI firearms specialist was properly admitted; 4) defendant had the services of a publicly-funded expert witness and was not entitled to a second one; 5) defendant was not entitled to public funding for a jury-selection expert; 6) there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction; 7) the jury properly found aggravating factors for vulnerable victim and lack of remorse; 8) the Federal Death Penalty Act is constitutional; but 9)! remand was necessary to determine the proper amount of restitution for the Medicare fraud convictions.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Whited, No. 07-1015
Conviction and sentence for possession, receipt, and distribution of child pornography are affirmed where: 1) an anticipatory warrant for the search of defendant's home was properly issued and executed; 2) a sentencing enhancement was properly applied; and 3) the sentence imposed was within the guidelines and therefore presumptively reasonable, and defendant failed to rebut the presumption.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Arreola-Castillo, No. 06-4055
A mandatory-minimum life sentence imposed upon conviction for conspiracy to distribute marijuana is affirmed over objections that: 1) the government failed to comply with the notice requirements for relying on a prior conviction for sentencing purposes; 2) one prior conviction was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt; and 3) two of defendant's prior convictions should only count as one conviction for sentencing purposes because they did not represent separate "criminal episodes."

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Thornton , No. 07-2839
Convictions for attempted bank robbery and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence are reversed for entry of judgment of acquittal where: 1) a jury instruction on the bank-robbery charge failed to require the jury to find actual intimidation; 2) the evidence would not support such a finding by any reasonable jury; and 3) the firearm conviction must also be reversed as a result of the reversal of the underlying conviction.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
Toliver v. McCaughtry, No. 06-3316
In a first-degree murder case, denial of habeas relief on the basis of both ineffective assistance of counsel and a Brady claim is reversed and remanded where: 1) the state court did not resolve factual questions of whether petitioner's trial counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and whether the prosecutor had received a letter that should have been disclosed as Brady evidence; 2) counsel's failure to introduce certain evidence prejudiced petitioner; and 3) the letter allegedly withheld by the prosecution would have constituted material, exculpatory evidence.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Venters, No. 07-3661
Conviction for possessing materials and equipment for manufacturing methamphetamine is affirmed where both exigent circumstances and probable cause to believe that defendant had committed child neglect justified police entry into defendant's home, and evidence seized as a result of that entry was not subject to suppression. .

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
Ben-Yisrayl v. Buss, No. 07-2151, 07-2281
In a murder case, denial of habeas relief is affirmed and limited grant of habeas relief is reversed where: 1) petitioner was not prejudiced by and failures on the part of his trial counsel; 2) petitioner's claims that his confession was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that the government had withheld Brady evidence, had been fully considered in state court; and 3) habeas relief could not be granted on a constitutionally-imposed state sentence. ...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Jackson, No. 06-3848, 06-4124, 06-4399
Convictions of three defendants for bank fraud involving generation of false mortgage loan documents are affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) the exclusion of hearsay evidence that a prosecution witness recanted prior statements and lied to the government; 2) sufficiency of the evidence used to convict; and 3) comments by the prosecutor in closing arguments suggesting the jury draw an adverse inference from defendants' decisions not to testify. ..

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Crissler, No. 07-3495
A conviction for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute, as well as a firearm offense, is affirmed over a claim that defendant was erroneously denied a Franks hearing on his motion to suppress evidence. .

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Brown, No. 08-1102
A 360-month sentence for a conspiracy drug offense involving distribution of marijuana and possession with intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine base after being convicted of a felony drug offense is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court made several sentencing errors; 2) the sentence imposed was unreasonably long; and 3) he was denied his sixth amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Jones, No. 07-1772
A sentence for distributing cocaine base (crack cocaine) within 1000 feet of a protected location is affirmed where there was no clear error with regard to the district court's drug-quantity determination or in its denial of a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. ..

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Herron, No. 07-2606
A conviction and sentence for assault with a dangerous weapon is affirmed over claims that the district court erred by: 1) denying a request to submit a lesser-included instruction on the offense of assault by striking, beating or wounding; 2) admitting the testimony of a VA employee; 3) denying a motion for mistrial; 4) denying a request for a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility; and 5) fining defendant $7,500.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Wright, No. 07-2407
A conviction and sentence for aggravated sexual abuse of a child is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) subject matter jurisdiction; 2) the sufficiency of the evidence on an attempted aggravated sexual assault conviction; 3) constructive amendment to the indictment; 4) Jencks Act violation; 5) erroneous admission of hearsay evidence; 6) erroneous admission of leading questions; and 7) sentencing issues. ..

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Azure, No. 07-2443
Revocation of defendant's supervised release and imposition of a 24-month sentence are affirmed over claims that the judgment of the district court should be vacated and the case remanded because: 1) the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to conduct the revocation hearing; 2) the district court failed to undertake the requisite de novo review of the entire record; 3) defendant was not present at the time the district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and sentenced him; and 4) his sentence was unconstitutionally imposed to punish him for the offense underlying his revocation, rather than for his original offense.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Wessels, No. 07-3208
In a case wherein defendant was convicted and sentenced for unauthorized use of a credit card, and later had her supervised release revoked and was sentenced again, the judgment is affirmed over a Fifth Amendment due process challenge. .

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Espinosa, No. 07-3226
A sentence for drug- and firearm-related offenses is affirmed over defendant's claim that the district court erred when, for purposes of determining the advisory sentencing range, it grouped only conspiracy and manufacturing counts, but not firearms counts. .

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Hogan, No. 07-3654
A conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute meth, possession with intent to distribute meth, and distribution of meth, is affirmed over claims that the district court erred in denying his motions to suppress and for acquittal, and in sentencing him to 188 months' imprisonment.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
US v. Allen, No. 07-3744
A conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and a felon in possession of ammunition is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court erred in permitting two witnesses to be improperly impeached; and 2) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
Godinez-Arroyo v. Mukasey, No. 064039
Petition to review decision ordering removal of petitioner for conviction of second-degree assault is denied where: 1) aliens convicted of "a crime involving moral turpitude" are subject to removal; 2) petitioner's conviction for "recklessly caus[ing] serious physical injury to another person" is a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; and 3) the Board of Immigration Appeals conclusion was persuasive.

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Howard, No. 07-1712
Conviction for obstruction of justice, threatening to murder an Assistant United States Attorney, and three counts of using a facility of interstate commerce to commit murder-for-hire is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) the district court abused its discretion by denying defendant's motion for continuance, contending that the unredacted recordings might contain exculpatory material and that his trial counsel was unable to focus adequately on the trial after the recordings were produced; and 2) the murder-for-hire indictment was constructively amended by the jury instructions' use of the word "of" instead of mirroring the indictment by using "in".

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
Torres v. City of Los Angeles, No. 06-55817
In a civil rights action against the City of Los Angeles, the LAPD, and four detectives arising from plaintiff's arrest on murder charges and 162 days of incarceration prior to his release, rulings in favor of defendants are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) dismissal of plaintiffs' case against one detective and of plaintiffs section 1983 claim against another detective was proper; but 2) judgment as a matter of law as to two detectives was error; and 3) the district court erred in part as to its denial of plaintiffs' in limine motions...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
Wooten v. Kirkland, No. 06-56575
Dismissal of a petition for habeas relief from a conviction for first degree murder is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's motion to stay his mixed petition as petitioner's "impression" that his counsel had exhausted an unexhausted claim did not constitute "good cause" for failure to exhaust that claim; and 2) the district court properly dismissed the habeas petition as mixed. ..

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 27, 2008
Mendez v. County of San Bernardino, No. 05-56118, 06-56424, 07-56029
In a suit against a city, county, sheriff's department and various individual defendants under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 arising from the aftermath of an officer-involved shooting that resulted in the death of plaintiff's deaf-mute son, various rulings against plaintiff before and after she prevailed in a jury trial are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) there was no error as to jury instruction on plaintiff's emotional damages; 2) reduction of the punitive damages award was proper as it was excessive as a matter of due process; 3) summary judgment on a state law negligent training claim was proper; 4) an order denying plaintiff all fees and costs required vacatur and a remand for a determination of a reasonable award; 5) a sanctions order had to be vacated where the district court did not make a requisite bad faith finding; and 6) reassignment to a different judge was not warranted. ...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
Nationwide Life Ins. Co. v. Richards, No. 06-56562
In an suit to resolve conflicting claims to the proceeds of a life-insurance policy, judgment that defendant, the wife of decedent, conspired in, aided and abetted the murder of decedent and was thus disqualified under state law from receiving life insurance proceeds is affirmed where: 1) defendant, having asserted the privilege against self-incrimination at her deposition, was properly precluded from testifying at trial that she was not involved in the murder; 2) an adverse inference could properly be drawn from defendant's exercise of the privilege against self-incrimination; 3) a witness was properly characterized as an out-of-state resident and thus unavailable for trial; and 4) alleged hearsay in the witness's deposition testimony in fact consisted of admissible co-conspirator statements made in furtherance of the conspiracy to murder decedent.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Gamba, No. 06-35021
On remand from the Supreme Court, denial of habeas relief for petitioner, convicted of witness tampering after a magistrate judge was allowed to preside over closing arguments, is affirmed where: 1) defense counsel may waive the defendant's right to have an Article III judge preside over closing argument without the defendant's express, personal consent where the decision is one of trial tactics or legal strategy; and 2) closing argument clearly bears a relation to specified duties magistrate judges are statutorily authorized to perform. ..

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Daniels, No. 07-50242
Sentence for possessing child pornography is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where: 1) a lifetime term of supervised release agreed to by defendant in his plea agreement was reasonable; 2) remand was required to determine whether a written condition of release requiring physiological testing conflicted with an oral pronouncement requiring psychological testing; and 3) other terms of the supervised release agreement were reasonable. ..

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Rivas-Macias, No. 06-2274
A conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and possessing with the intent to distribute cocaine is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court infringed his right to present a defense when it erroneously concluded that one of defendant's coconspirators retained his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination; and 2) the district court erred in failing, sua sponte, to continue his trial until after the coconspirator's sentencing. .

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
US v. Gambino-Zavala, No. 07-2231
A conviction and sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition by an illegal alien is affirmed where: 1) a claim of erroneous denial of a suppression motion failed as exigent circumstances justified officers' warrantless search of an apartment; and 2) the sentence was both procedurally and substantively reasonable.

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
US v. Miera, No. 07-4211
In a bank robbery case involving circumstances in which, during the course of the robbery, defendant stood in front of the bank's door waving a gun and demanding that the bank's occupants "don't move", defendant's sentence is affirmed where the district court did not err in enhancing defendant's offense level for physically restraining persons during a bank robbery. .

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 26, 2008
State of Wyoming v. US, No. 07-8046
In an action seeking review of the ATF's interpretation of 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) and a Wyoming law, which established a procedure to expunge misdemeanor convictions "for the purposes of restoring any firearm rights lost", dismissal of Wyoming's suit is affirmed where: 1) Congress intended the terms "expunge" and "set aside" as used in section 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) to require a state procedure that completely removes the effects of the misdemeanor conviction in question; and 2) the Wyoming law at issue fell short of such standard.

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Shockey, No. 08-7013
Appeal of a sentence for conspiracy and possession of a counterfeit security is dismissed over objections that the sentence was ambiguous and internally contradictory where defendant had waived his right to appeal in his plea, and no applicable exception to the waiver existed.

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 25, 2008
Davis v. Barrow, No. 07-12575
In a matter brought under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, dismissal of section 2254 habeas petition is affirmed where: 1) the one-year statute of limitations was not tolled pending consideration of petitioner's section 17-10-1(f) motion; and 2) petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus was untimely. .

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
Turner v. Burnside , No. 0600293
In inmate-plaintiff's claim against prison officials for cruel and unusual punishment as a result of an incident in which plaintiff was deliberately exposed to electrical shock, dismissal of complaint is vacated and remanded where a prison official’s serious threats of substantial retaliation against an inmate for lodging in good faith a grievance make the administrative remedy "unavailable," and thus lift PLRA's requirement to exhaust available administrative remedies. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Johnson, No. 08-10029
Regarding sentence of 39 months for information with conspiracy to commit identification document fraud, government's motion to dismiss is granted where over claims of error that defendant knowingly and voluntarily executed an appeal waiver as part of his plea agreement. .

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 28, 2008
US v. Mercer, No. 0613258
Conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized from a warrantless search of a hotel room; and 2) the evidence presented was insufficient to support his convictions.

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, August 29, 2008
US v. Williams, No. 0711707
Conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base is affirmed over claims that the district court erred by: 1) commenting on certain testimony defendant sought to elicit during his case-in-chief; 2) charging the jury with a flight instruction; 3) denying defendant's motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct during voir dire; and 4) considering prior juvenile convictions in determining defendant's criminal history category at sentencing. Sentence is vacated and remanded where the district court improperly declared defendant ineligible for federal benefits for life. ..

Supreme Court of California, August 25, 2008
People v. Carasi, No. S070839
In a death penalty case, the conviction and sentence is affirmed on automatic appeal over claims of error regarding: 1) jury selection; 2) denial of severance; 3) ex parte in camera meetings; 4) admission of evidence regarding a bankruptcy consultation; 5) a pathologist's testimony; 6) provocation and lesser included offense instructions; 7) the sufficiency of the evidence of financial gain; 8) Skipper/Lockett error; 9) lingering doubt evidence; 10) prosecutorial misconduct; 11) the effect of the ex parte in camera meetings on a modification motion; and 12) the validity of the death penalty law.

Supreme Court of California, August 28, 2008
People v. Lindberg, No. S066527
In a death penalty case, conviction and sentence are affirmed on automatic appeal over claims of error regarding: 1) evidence admitted at trial regarding prior uncharged crimes; 2) sufficiency of the evidence of first degree felony murder and the robbery special circumstance; 3) a jury instruction on evidence of other crimes; 4) sufficiency of evidence of the hate-murder special circumstance; 5) prejudice caused by expert evidence regarding white supremacy; 6) the constitutionality of jury instructions on the death penalty; 7) the court's failure to clarify the meaning of "life without the possibility of parole"; 8) the constitutionality of the death penalty statute; and 9) cumulative error. .

Supreme Court of California, August 28, 2008
People v. Cross, No. S139791
Sentence for committing a lewd act on a child under the age of 14, and enhancement of that sentence for a finding of great bodily injury, is affirmed where: 1) a pregnancy without medical complications resulting from unlawful but nonforcible intercourse can support a finding of great bodily injury; and 2) jury instructions on whether abortion may constitute great bodily injury were inapplicable given that defendant did not personally perform an abortion on the victim, but defendant was not prejudiced by the instructions.

Supreme Court of Florida, August 28, 2008
Thompson v. State of Florida, No. SC07-489
Petition for postconviction relief on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel is denied as to petitioner's conviction, and granted and remanded as to sentencing where: 1) the federal Strickland test was the proper standard for evaluating ineffective-assistance claims brought in state postconviction proceedings; 2) petitioner's counsel's failure to timely request disqualification of the trial judge for evidence of bias and predisposition was deficient performance; 3) petitioner was not prejudiced by this deficiency with respect to his conviction; but 4) petitioner was prejudiced with respect to his eventual sentencing.

Supreme Court of Florida, August 28, 2008
Morton v. State of Florida, No. SC06-2091
In a capital murder case, denial of postconviction relief is affirmed and petition for habeas relief is denied where: 1) petitioner failed to demonstrate that his counsel rendered deficient performance with respect to investigating petitioner's background and evaluating his mental health, or that he was prejudiced by it; 2) petitioner's claim that he received an inadequate mental health evaluation was procedurally barred; 3) the postconviction court was not required to take judicial notice of the ABA Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Counsel in Death Penalty Cases; 4) an evidentiary hearing was not required on new evidence that would influence the weight given to age as a mitigating factor; and 5) petitioner raised no habeas claims that warranted relief.

Supreme Court of Florida, August 28, 2008
Saintelien v. State of Florida, No. SC06-1888
Sentence for attempted sexual battery on a child, which included a designation as a sexual predator, is affirmed where a motion to correct an illegal sentence made under Florida criminal-procedure rules may be used to challenge a sexual predator designation, but only in cases where it is apparent from the face of the record that the defendant did not meet the criteria for designation as a sexual predator. ..

Supreme Court of Florida, August 28, 2008
Evans v. State of Florida, No. SC05-1617, SC07-494
In a capital murder case, denial of postconviction relief is affirmed and habeas relief denied over claims of error regarding: 1) denial of requests for public records; 2) ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; 3) undisclosed Brady evidence; 4) the constitutionality of rules barring the defense from interviewing jurors for possible misconduct; 5) the constitutionality of Florida's death sentencing statute; 6) the prohibitions against executing juveniles and the mentally retarded; and 7) cumulative error.

Supreme Court of Florida, August 28, 2008
San Martin v. State of Florida, No. SC05-831
In a capital murder case, denial of postconviction relief is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) a Giglio violation with respect to penalty-phase testimony by a codefendant; and 2) ineffective assistance of counsel.

Supreme Court of Delaware, August 29, 2008
Harris v. State of Delaware, No. 125, 2008
Conviction and sentence for unlawful sexual contact are reversed where a six-year delay in imposing sentence, without any justifiable reason or explanation, violated defendant's right to a speedy sentencing.

Supreme Court of Delaware, August 29, 2008
Lopez-Vazquez v. State of Delaware, No. 547, 2007
Convictions on various drug charges are reversed and remanded where: 1) there was no reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity to justify a Terry stop of defendant; 2) defendant's subsequent consent to a search was thereby tainted; and 3) the evidence obtained from that search must therefore be suppressed.

California Appellate Districts, August 25, 2008
People v. Brandon, No. E042885
Grant of motion to revoke defendant's status in an outpatient program for treatment as a mentally disordered offender is affirmed where: 1) the trial court did not err by allowing her to represent herself in light of the fact that defendant's initial one-year commitment has expired and she has been recommitted for a further one-year period; and 2) defendant's other contentions were not meritorious.

California Appellate Districts, August 27, 2008
P. v. Morris, No. A119162
Conviction for grand theft, receiving stolen property, and two prison prior allegations is affirmed in part and reversed in part where the conviction of receiving stolen property must be reversed as it was based upon his possession of the very same property that formed the basis of his grand theft conviction.

California Appellate Districts, August 27, 2008
P. v. Bolton , No. D050721
Conviction for assault with a deadly weapon, mayhem, battery, and resisting an officer is reversed and remanded where the trial court erred in relieving defendant's attorney just a few days prior to trial, based on the attorney's assertion that a conflict of interest existed. .

California Appellate Districts, August 28, 2008
In re Antonio B. , No. B203662
In petition alleging counts of possession of marijuana and cocaine for sale by a minor, denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence and a petition declaring him a ward of the state is reversed where: 1) the conduct of the police officers exceeded a reasonable detention under the circumstances; 2) defendant was under arrest at the time the officer asked for permission to search him; 3) there was no probable cause to arrest him at that time, his consent to the search was not voluntary; and 4) the evidence discovered as a result of the search must be suppressed.