FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Criminal

US v. McElroy

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence, Government Law, Sentencing, Tax Law, White Collar Crime) Defendants' sentence and conviction for conspiring to defraud the US of employment and income taxes and to commit insurance fraud by use of the mails and for procuring false tax returns is affirmed where: 1) a denial of motion to suppress evidence found at a certain address was correct as the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of probable cause; 2) prosecutor's remarks regarding a trial exhibit did not constitute reversible error; 3) district court did not commit reversible error by admitting into evidence summary testimony and charts; 4) district court did not commit reversible error by allowing the prosecutors to elicit out-of-court testimony identifying one of the defendants; and 5) district court did not err in including unpaid state taxes in the total tax loss amount used to calculate the base offense level for sentencing the defendants.

Carr v. Dist. of Columbia

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure) In an action alleging that the police unlawfully arrested plaintiffs during a protest, summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where the city did not have probable cause to believe that the protesters knew the protest at issue lacked a permit. However, the order is reversed in part where: 1) the city only needed to show that the officers had reasonable grounds to believe that everyone arrested was part of the rioting group; and 2) the city could lawfully complete the mass arrest without first ordering the crowd to disperse and giving plaintiffs an opportunity to comply.

Mitchell v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. D.C. Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Criminal Law & Procedure) In a prisoner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, the application is denied where, although plaintiff had only two "strikes" under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and thus the PLRA did not automatically bar him from proceeding IFP, the court denied the application as a discretionary matter because of plaintiff's pattern of abusive litigation in the past and his failure to qualify for IFP status under the imminent danger exception.

US v. Hardy

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence, Tax Law, White Collar Crime) In a prosecution for bank fraud and tax evasion, district court's exclusion of defense evidence on the ground that defendant failed to comply with the reciprocal discovery requirement of Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(c) is affirmed as the district court did not err in excluding the evidence, but even if the court did err, it was harmless error because the excluded evidence would not have created reasonable doubt.

US v. Thompson

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Juvenile Law, Sentencing) Defendant's sentence to 28 months' imprisonment for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base is affirmed as the district court properly attributed six criminal history points to defendant's prior convictions and two additional points under U.S.S.G. section 4A1.1(e) because the instant offense occurred less than two years after his release from his juvenile confinement, for a total of eight criminal history points and a sentencing guidelines range of 24 to 30 months.

White v. Howes

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Habeas Corpus, Sentencing) District court's grant of petition for habeas relief on the ground that the trial court violated the Double Jeopardy Clause by convicting defendant for both the felon in possession statute and the felony firearm statute is reversed as current jurisprudence allows for multiple punishment for the same offense provided the legislature has clearly indicated its intent to so provide and recognizes no exception for necessarily included or overlapping offenses.

US v. Miller

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence, Tax Law, White Collar Crime) Defendant's tax evasion conviction and sentence are affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence regarding settlement negotiations because that evidence did not relate to defendant's alleged embezzlement activities; 2) the district court properly refused to exclude defendant's spouse's testimony under the marital privilege because that testimony referred to acts, not communications; and 3) the district court properly gave a deliberate ignorance instruction because the evidence demonstrated that defendant was subjectively aware of a high probability of existence of illegal conduct.

N-A-M v. Holder

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 10th Cir., Administrative Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Immigration Law) In a petition for review of the BIA's order removing petitioner to El Salvador, the petition is denied where: 1) petitioner's prior state offense of felony menacing was a "particularly serious crime" under 8 U.S.C. section 1231; and 2) the Immigration Judge's reliance on a Statement in Support of Warrantless Arrest detailing petitioner's prior offense was not fundamentally unfair.

DeBurgo v. Amand

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence, Habeas Corpus) Denial of defendant's request for habeas relief arising from his conviction for armed assault with intent to murder and assault and batter by means of a dangerous weapon is affirmed where: 1) a state appeals court's analysis of the sufficiency of the evidence was not an unreasonable application of the Supreme Court's standard announced in Jackson given the sufficiently suggestive circumstantial evidence presented; and 2) defendant was not deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury.

Jennings v. Jones

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence, Injury And Tort Law) In plaintiff's civil rights case against the state of Rhode Island and a State Police representative and other police officers who had executed a search warrant of his workplace at the Narrangansett Indian Tribe "smoke shop", jury's verdict in favor of defendant in the second trial is affirmed as: 1) there was no abuse of discretion in granting a new trial based on the ground that, even if the jury verdict had unambiguously rested on the increased force theory, that theory would have been contrary to the weight of the evidence; and 2) there was no waiver of the new trial motion by defendant.

US v. Miller

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Asset Forfeiture, Criminal Law & Procedure, Government Law) District court's order to destroy 34 firearms and for defendant to collect just compensation from the government arising from his conviction of aiding and abetting the possession of firearms by a felon, is vacated and remanded where: 1) because the government did not commence a timely forfeiture proceeding, defendant's property interest in the firearms continues even though his possessory interest has been curtailed; and 2) as such, if the government does not want to sell the firearms for his account, then it must offer defendant some other lawful option, such as having a trustee sell or hold the guns, or giving them to someone who can be relied on to treat them as his own.

In re Ronje

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(Cal. App., Criminal Law & Procedure) Defendant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted as the assessment protocols used to evaluate defendant leading to the SVPA commitment petition is invalid as an underground regulation, and as such, the appropriate remedy is to order new evaluations of defendant using a valid assessment protocol and to conduct another probable cause hearing under section 6602(a) based on the new evaluations.

People v. Rios

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(Cal. App., Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence) Conviction of defendant for carjacking and use of a firearm is affirmed as the controlling constitutional rule in Seibert is that set forth in Associate Justice M. Kennedy's concurring opinion as it does not abrogate the implied waiver rule first articulated by the Supreme Court in Butler, and thus the implied waiver rule, which applies to this case, is not rescinded by Seibert. As a result, substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding that defendant's admissions were admissible.

Perkins v. Russo

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Evidence) District court's denial of defendant's request for habeas relief is affirmed as, even with plenary review, defendant's subordination of perjury claim fails as the victim had identified him multiple time before he was ever even arguably pressed to testify by one of the police officers.

US v. Moser

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 8th Cir., Asset Forfeiture, Attorney's Fees, Civil Procedure, Criminal Law & Procedure, Government Law) In a petition for attorney's fees pursuant to the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA) after petitioner prevailed in an asset forfeiture proceeding pursuant to 21 U.S.C. section 853(n), denial of the petition is affirmed where the arguments for and against permitting a prevailing section 853(n) petitioner to receive attorneys' fees from the government were too closely balanced to allow the court of appeals to conclude that Congress's waiver of sovereign immunity clearly and unequivocally applied in this situation.