|
0 Comments
United States v. Diaz Docket: 19-11112 Opinion Date: March 1, 2021 Judge: Jerry Edwin Smith Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for conspiring to acquire a firearm from a licensed firearms dealer by false or fictitious statement. Defendant and her husband served as illegal straw-purchasers in a weapons-trafficking arrangement. The court concluded that the district court did not plainly err when it instructed defendant as to the elements of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6). The court rejected defendant's contention that the reasoning in Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191, 2200 (2019) -- which held that, in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) and 924(a)(2), the Government must prove both that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm -- extends to section 922(a)(6). Plaintiff argued that, to convict for conspiracy to violate section 922(a)(6), the government must prove not only that she knowingly made a false statement but also that she made such statement to a seller she knew to be a licensed dealer. However, the court explained that Rehaif does not compel such a conclusion and that Rehaif expressly limited its application in relation to other portions within subsection (g). The court concluded that, even if Rehaif compels the inclusion of the scienter requirement for which defendant advocates for prosecutions under sections 922(a)(6) and 924(a)(2), that is not the crime of which she pleaded guilty. Furthermore, section 371 does not contain the "knowingly" requirement included in section 924(a)(2). Even after Rehaif, and even for prosecutions under sections 922(a)(6) and 924(a)(2), the court has continued to adhere to its long-held view of what the government must prove under section 922(a)(6). The court also rejected defendant's claim for selective or vindictive prosecution based on her appeal waiver. Finally, the court dismissed defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions In Re: Travis Harris Docket: 19-51045 Opinion Date: February 25, 2021 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Criminal Law Movant seeks authorization to file a successive 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion challenging his conviction and sentence under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(A) for using and possessing a destructive device during and in relation to a crime of violence. Movant argues that his conviction should be vacated because the predicate offense for his conviction, arson in violation of 18 U.S.C. 844(i), qualified as a "crime of violence" only under the residual clause in section 924(c)(3)(B), which pursuant to United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319, 2325–26, 2336 (2019), is unconstitutionally vague. The Fifth Circuit concluded that movant has made a sufficient showing of possible merit to warrant a fuller exploration by the district court, and ordered that the motion be granted. Read Opinion United States v. DeJean Docket: 19-30865 Opinion Date: February 23, 2021 Judge: Stuart Kyle Duncan Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction of mail fraud and making false statements to a bank. In this case, defendant, as justice of the peace, exploited his position to steal thousands of dollars in public funds, which he used for casino gambling. The court rejected defendant's challenge to the district court's decision to seat a juror who, defendant claims, was biased against gamblers. Rather, the court deferred to the district court's broad discretion in assessing the juror's impartiality. In this case, the juror's negative views about gambling implicate nothing like the kind of structural bias against all criminal defendants. Furthermore, the district court affirmatively found the juror's views on gambling (unlike other jurors who were dismissed for cause on that ground) would not prevent her from being impartial. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Echeverry v. Jazz Casino Co., LLC Docket: 20-30038 Opinion Date: February 17, 2021 Judge: Leslie Southwick Areas of Law: Personal Injury The Fifth Circuit withdrew its prior opinion. After plaintiff was injured when a manlift struck her outside Harrah's Casino in New Orleans, a jury found Jazz Casino negligent, assigning it 49% of the fault. Plaintiff was awarded, among other jury awards, $1,000,000 for future pain and suffering. The Casino appealed. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the finding of negligence under a negligent hiring theory, operational control theory, and authorization of unsafe work practices theory presented to jurors. The court also held that none of the objected-to evidence was erroneously admitted at trial. However, the court held that the jury's $1,000,000 award for future pain, suffering, mental anguish, disability, scarring, and disfigurement was excessive. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's denial of the Casino's motion for judgment as a matter of law and motion for a new trial, vacated the award for future pain and suffering, and remanded for further proceedings. Read Opinion LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT EXTENDS JURY TRIAL MORATORIUM
THROUGH MARCH 31, 2021 www.lasc.org/Press_Release?p=2021-06 US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Lefebure v. D'Aquilla Docket: 19-30702 Opinion Date: February 9, 2021 Judge: James C. Ho Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law Plaintiff filed suit alleging that Barrett Boeker, her cousin's husband, raped and sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions at his home on the grounds of the Louisiana state prison where he serves as an assistant warden. Plaintiff also alleges that Samuel D'Aquilla, the district attorney, conspired with Boeker and others to prevent her from seeking justice for these crimes. The Fifth Circuit held that, under established precedent, it has no jurisdiction to reach plaintiff's claims against D’Aquilla, because she has no Article III standing. The court explained that Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973), makes clear that "a citizen lacks standing to contest the policies of the prosecuting authority when he himself is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution." Accordingly, the court has no choice but to reverse and remand with instructions to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as to D'Aquilla. Read Opinion Governor Edwards extends Modified Phase-2 order for 3 more weeks
www.wwltv.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/3-pm-louisiana-covid-19-vaccine-update-from-gov-edwards/289-85903ebc-24a5-48c4-bd49-23fa9375bf51 United States v. Martinez Docket: 20-20148 Opinion Date: February 8, 2021 Judge: Jennifer Walker Elrod Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit withdrew its prior opinion and substituted the following opinion. The court vacated defendant's condition of supervised release requiring defendant to "participate in an inpatient or outpatient substance-abuse treatment program" supervised by defendant's probation officer. The court concluded that the option to require inpatient rehabilitation delegates to the probation officer the judicial decision to significantly restrict defendant's liberty during treatment. In this case, because of defendant's short ten-month sentence, the district court should not have delegated the decision to further restrict defendant's liberty during the course of treatment while on supervised release. Therefore, the court remanded for further proceedings. Read Opinion Louisiana Secures Multi-Million Dollar Settlement with McKinsey & Co for Its Role in Opioid Epidemic
www.houmatimes.com/news/ag-louisiana-secures-multi-million-dollar-settlement-with-mckinsey-co-for-its-role-in-opioid-epidemic/ United States v. Winters Docket: 20-30138 Opinion Date: February 3, 2021 Judge: Leslie Southwick Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to reduce defendant's sentence under the First Step Act. The court held that defendant's dual-object conspiracy offense under 21 U.S.C. 846, which was committed before August 3, 2010, is a covered offense under Section 404(a) of the First Step Act. The court also held that the district court had statutory authority under Section 404 to reduce defendant's sentence from 233 months to 180 months. Finally, the court held that neither of Section 404(c)'s limitations apply. Therefore, defendant is eligible for relief under the First Step Act. Read Opinion Haddock v. Tarrant County Docket: 19-11327 Opinion Date: February 1, 2021 Judge: Edith Brown Clement Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law Plaintiff filed suit against seven district judges of Tarrant County's family law courts in their official capacities, District Judge Patricia Baca-Bennett in her personal capacity, and the County under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging that she was fired for refusing to support a political candidate and for her husband's political activity. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the suit, holding that plaintiff was in a policymaking and confidential role and thus, under the Elrod/Branti exception, could constitutionally be discharged for the exercise of rights that would otherwise by protected by the First Amendment. The court also held that the district court correctly dismissed plaintiff's claims against the County because plaintiff failed to plead a constitutional violation. Furthermore, because Baca-Bennett did not violate plaintiff's constitutional rights, this is enough for Baca-Bennett to be entitled to qualified immunity. Even if plaintiff's rights had been violated, Baca-Bennett certainly did not have "fair warning that [her] conduct violate[d] a constitutional right." Read Opinion Washington v. Louisiana Docket: 2019-KK-01792 Opinion Date: January 27, 2021 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law Defendant Jamal Washington was indicted for racketeering; human trafficking; and conspiracy to commit human trafficking. With regard to racketeering, the indictment alleged that defendant, his codefendants, and other persons, known and unknown, engaged in conduct that furthered a criminal enterprise involved in narcotics distribution and prostitution. Defendant pleaded guilty to racketeering, and the State in exchange dismissed the remaining charges and agreed to forego recidivist sentence enhancement. The district court sentenced defendant in conformity with the plea agreement to serve eight years imprisonment at hard labor. The court of appeal affirmed. Thereafter, defendant sought clarification that the court had not designated the offense as a crime of violence. A minute entry indicated that the district court had designated the offense as a crime of violence. However, no such designation was evident in the sentencing transcript. The district court denied the motion. The court of appeal determined that racketeering was not a crime of violence because it was not enumerated as such in La. R.S. 14:2(B), and because the use (or attempted use) of physical force was not an element of racketeering, as that crime was defined by statute. Therefore, the court of appeal found that the crime was incorrectly designated as a crime of violence in the district court's minute entry. The Louisiana Supreme Court found defendant did not admit to human trafficking when he pleaded guilty to racketeering, and the State dismissed the charge of human trafficking. Defendant also did not admit that he personally performed any violent acts in the factual basis for his guilty plea. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the court of appeal, which reversed the district court’s ruling denying defendant’s motion to correct the sentencing minute entry to reflect that the offense was not designated as a crime of violence, and which remanded to the district court for correction of the minute entry. Read Opinion Louisiana Supreme Court Opinions Lousiana v. Cohen Docket: 2019-K-00949 Opinion Date: January 27, 2021 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law Sixteen-year old Donasty Cohen was charged with second-degree murder for the death of her 27-day-old infant son. After trial, a jury found her guilty of manslaughter. The district court sentenced her to serve 17 years imprisonment at hard labor without parole eligibility. The court of appeal affirmed after deleting the restriction on eligibility for parole. On appeal to the Louisiana Supreme Court, defendant argued only that the district court erred in denying her challenge for cause of one prospective juror. In the course of reviewing the record, it became apparent that the verdict in this case was non-unanimous. The sealed jury polling slips contained in the record showed defendant was found guilty of manslaughter by vote of 11-1. The State conceded the verdict was not unanimous. The Court held defendant was entitled to a new trial. The appellate court's judgment was reversed, the conviction and sentence vacated, and the matter remanded fur further proceedings. Read Opinion DSNAP Approved for 6 Parishes Hit by Hurricane Zeta, including Lafourche and Terrebonne
www.houmatimes.com/news/dsnap-approved-for-6-parishes-hit-by-hurricane-zeta-including-lafourche-and-terrebonne/ Louisiana hemp growers affected by USDA’s final rule regulating production in the U.S.
www.klfy.com/louisiana/louisiana-hemp-growers- affected-by-usdas-final-rule-regulating-production-in-the-u-s/ United States v. Warren Docket: 19-10805 Opinion Date: January 22, 2021 Judge: Don R. Willett Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed Defendant Martinez and Warren's convictions and sentences for multiple federal charges for their roles in a telemarketing timeshare-exit scam that bilked millions from owners eager to escape timeshares they could no longer afford. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support Martinez's convictions for conspiracy (Count One), mail fraud (Counts Two through Six), and wire fraud (Counts Seven and Eight); the district court did not err or abuse its discretion by permitting the timeshare owners to testify about their conversations with telemarketers; the district court did not err by imposing consecutive six-month sentences under 18 U.S.C. 2326(1); the district court did not clearly err in determining that Warren was a "manager or supervisor" and applying a three-level increase to his offense level under USSG 3B1.1(b); and Martinez's contention that the district court's restitution order violated his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial is foreclosed by circuit precedent. Read Opinion Biden issues 60-day moratorium on oil and gas drilling permits in Gulf of Mexico www.houmatimes.com/news/president-biden-issues-60-day-moratorium-on-oil-and-gas-drilling-permits-in-gulf-of-mexico/ Stringer v. Town of Jonesboro Docket: 20-30192 Opinion Date: January 19, 2021 Judge: Duncan Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Environmental Law, Zoning, Planning & Land Use Since 2011, Jonesboro’s wastewater system has spewed sewage onto Stringer’s property and into her home during heavy rains. Stringer repeatedly complained to the town and its mayor, then brought a “citizen suit” under the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1365, with constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for the uncompensated taking of her property and the mayor’s retaliation. Stringer ran against the mayor in 2014 and claims he retaliated by ignoring her pleas, getting the town to sue her frivolously, and refusing to provide sandbags. The Louisiana Departments of Health (LDOH) and Environmental Quality (LDEQ) have long known about the problems. LDEQ sent the town warning letters and issued compliance orders about unauthorized discharges, including those afflicting Stringer. LDOH issued a compliance order about the discharges on Stringer’s property, imposed mandatory ameliorative measures, and assessed a daily fine. The district court dismissed, finding that the CWA prohibits such suits when a state is addressing the problem through “comparable” state law and finding her section 1983 claims untimely under Louisiana’s one-year prescriptive period. The Fifth Circuit affirmed as to the section 1983 claims. Stringer was long aware of the underlying facts and failed to sue within a year. The Fifth Circuit reversed in part. The enforcement action to which the court pointed—the state health department’s enforcement of the sanitary code—is not “comparable” to the CWA under circuit precedent. Read Opinion THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT ISSUES A NEW ORDER IMPOSING MORATORIUM ON JURY TRIALS UNTIL MARCH 1, 2021 - PRESS RELEASE www.lasc.org/Press_Release?p=2021-02 Moratorium on Jury Trials in Terrebonne, Lafourche, Louisiana The Louisiana Supreme Court, citing public health concerns surrounding COVID-19, has canceled the start of Louisiana jury trials until March 1, 2021. The Order of the Court reads, "No civil or criminal jury trial shall commence in any Louisiana state court before March 1, 2021." www.lasc.org/COVID19/Orders/2021-01-11_LASC_ORDER.pdf US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Parkerson Docket: 19-10780 Opinion Date: January 12, 2021 Judge: E. Grady Jolly Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's 120-month sentence for failing to register as a sex offender, holding that defendant's sentence is both procedurally and substantively reasonable. In regard to defendant's claims of procedural error, the court held that the district court did not err in considering a contested account contained in the PSR that was drawn from a police report, because this evidence bears sufficient indicia of reliability. Furthermore, the district court did not reversibly err by considering the opinion of a TDCJ psychologist that defendant's likelihood of reoffending was high. The court gave deference to the district court's application of the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors and concluded that defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable in light of his history of sexual violence and considerations for public safety. Read Opinion Lafourche native sworn in as the 26th Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court
www.houmatimes.com/news/lafourche-native-sworn-in-as-the-26th-chief-justice-of-the-louisiana-supreme-court/ United States v. Morton Docket: 19-10842 Opinion Date: January 5, 2021 Judge: E. Grady Jolly Areas of Law: Criminal Law The good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule does not allow officers to search the photographs on a defendant's cellphones for evidence of drug possession, when the affidavits supporting the search warrants were based only on evidence of personal drug possession and an officer's generalized allegations about the behavior of drug traffickers—not drug users. The Fifth Circuit held that the officers' affidavits do not provide probable cause to search the photographs stored on the defendant’s cellphones. Furthermore, the good faith exception does not apply because the officers' reliance on the defective warrants was objectively unreasonable. While respecting the "great deference" that the presiding judge is owed, the court further held that he did not have a substantial basis for his probable cause determination with regard to the photographs. Therefore, the digital images found in defendant's cellphones are inadmissible and the court vacated his conviction, remanding for further proceedings. Read Opinion Dagate, Ellender Jr. Sworn in as New Judges for the Terrebonne Prish 32nd District Court
www.houmatimes.com/news/dagate-ellender-jr-sworn-in-as-new-judges-for-the-terrebonne-prish-32nd-district-court/ |
Louisiana Law BlogLouisiana Law, News, Issues and Comments from Attorneys at the Shoultz Law Firm Archives
February 2021
Categories
|
RSS Feed