Louisiana v. Miguel Docket: 2018-KK-0711 Opinion Date: January 30, 2019 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law Defendant Melvin Miguel was driving a vehicle that was stopped because it had a cracked windshield. Defendant had been driving with a suspended driver’s license and a fraudulent license plate. In addition, he admitted smoking marijuana. Before asking defendant to exit his vehicle, a detective scanned the interior and noticed an orange prescription bottle, with the name on the label peeled off, sitting in the broken driver’s side door handle. Defendant and his passengers disclaimed ownership of the bottle. Defendant exited the vehicle, was handcuffed and Mirandized, and placed inside a police vehicle. The detective then retrieved the pill bottle, opened it, and discovered five Hydrocodone pills. Defendant was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance, and cited for several traffic violations. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence found in the bottle on several grounds, including that the pill bottle was not immediately apparent as contraband to justify a warrantless search and seizure. The district court denied the motion to suppress after conducting a hearing and reviewing the detective’s body camera video. The court of appeal found the district court erred in denying defendant’s motion to suppress. The Louisiana Supreme Court concluded the appellate court erred, reversed its holding and affirmed the trial court. Read Opinion
0 Comments
United States v. Perdomo Docket: 15-40958 Opinion Date: January 28, 2019 Judge: James Earl Graves, Jr. Areas of Law: Criminal Law On remand from the Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment reflecting that defendant was convicted under 8 U.S.C. 1326(b)(2) rather than section 1326(b)(1). The court held that, in light of the Supreme Court's opinion in United States v. Stitt, 139 S.Ct. 399 (2018), holding that Arkansas residential burglary "falls within the scope of generic burglary's definition," defendant's conviction was an aggravated felony. Read Opinion Judge advances Louisiana public defense lawsuit, calls funding woes bad excuse for violating rights www.theadvocate.com/acadiana/news/courts/article_2ba286b6-2021-11e9-b60e-1f8f0c190611.html US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Freeman Docket: 17-40739 Opinion Date: January 25, 2019 Judge: James Earl Graves, Jr. Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of defendant's motion to suppress evidence from the first stop of his truck and denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence from the second stop of his truck. In this case, defendant was stopped twice over the course of several months while driving his truck along Farm-to-Market Road 2050 near the Texas-Mexico border, once by a county deputy and once by a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. Defendant was charged with conspiracy to transport an illegal alien within the United States and transportation of an alien within the United States for financial gain. The court applied the Brignoni-Ponce factors and held that the district court's conclusion that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct the roving patrol stop was supported by the evidence. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions 84 Lumber Co. v. Continental Casualty Co. Docket: 18-30170 Opinion Date: January 24, 2019 Judge: Jacques Loeb Wiener, Jr. Areas of Law: Civil Procedure Neither sending notice by email nor sending it to a general contractor's lawyer satisfies LA. REV. STAT. 2247's unambiguous requirements that (1) notice be sent by registered or certified mail (2) to the general contractor at any place in Louisiana that it maintains an office. In this case, 84 Lumber filed two sworn statements of claim under the Louisiana Public Works Act (LPWA), alleging that Paschen and J & A failed to pay for its work on those projects. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment and held that 84 Lumber's notice did not comply with the LPWA's notice requirements, and that the evidence established only that the notice was sent but did not establish that it was received. Read Opinion Louisiana school district, separation of church and state group settle religion lawsuit www.foxnews.com/faith-values/louisiana-school-district-separation-of-church-and-state-group-settle-religion-lawsuit Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning and Preventative Health Services v. Smith Docket: 17-50282 Opinion Date: January 17, 2019 Judge: Edith Hollan Jones Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government & Administrative Law, Health Law Provider Plaintiffs and Individual Plaintiffs filed suit seeking a preliminary injunction against the OIG's decision to terminate the Medicaid provider agreements to Planned Parenthood affiliates throughout the state. The district court held that the Individual Plaintiffs possessed a private right of action under the "qualified-provider" provision of the Medicaid Act and issued a preliminary injunction. The Fifth Circuit held that the district court erred in evaluating the evidence de novo, rather than under the arbitrary and capricious standard, and in applying the reasoning in Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast v. Gee, 862 F.3d 445 (5th Cir. 2017), to its determination of a "qualified" provider in this context. Therefore, the district court erred legally and plaintiffs were unlikely to show a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim. Accordingly, the court vacated the preliminary injunction and remanded for the district court to limit its review to the agency record under an arbitrary-and-capricious standard. Read Opinion Louisiana Enters the Era of the Digital Driver's License www.govtech.com/gov-experience/Louisiana-Enters-the-Era-of-the-Digital-Drivers-License-.html United States v. Arellano-Banuelos Docket: 17-11490 Opinion Date: January 14, 2019 Judge: Stephen Andrew Higginson Areas of Law: Criminal Law Defendant appealed his conviction for illegal reentry. Because the district court's factual findings provided an inadequate basis for appellate review, the Fifth Circuit remanded for the district court to make additional findings as to whether defendant was "in custody" within the meaning of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The court declined to reach the other issues raised on appeal at this time. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Thompson v. Dallas City Attorney's Office Docket: 17-10952 Opinion Date: January 11, 2019 Judge: Willett Areas of Law: Civil Procedure Henson v. Columbus Bank & Trust Co., which allows a plaintiff to litigate in federal court a claim previously dismissed in state court, was not binding and contravened preexisting full faith a credit precedent. The Fifth Circuit held that res judicata precedent barred plaintiff's workplace discrimination claims after a Georgia state court determined that related claims were time-barred. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's action on res judicata grounds. Read Opinion United States v. Piper Docket: 17-10913 Opinion Date: January 10, 2019 Judge: Per Curiam Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed Defendant Piper and Cortinas' conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The court held that Piper was not deprived of due process and compulsory process under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments when the government did not produce a witness at trial because the witness' hearsay statements were inadmissible. Because the testimony was not clearly admissible, Piper could not show that denying the motion to continue would have resulted in serious prejudice. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Piper's motion for a new trial and the district court's application of a two-level enhancement for importation was not clearly erroneous. In regard to Cortinas and Piper's joint claim, the court held that the district court did not commit plain error in charging the jury and the verdict form was not ambiguous, inconsistent, nor did it incorrectly state the law. Read Opinion Louisiana gets federal funds to help train workers in finding jobs for mentally ill www.wdsu.com/article/louisiana-gets-federal-funds-to-help-train-workers-in-finding-jobs-for-mentally-ill/25781220 Maria S. v. Doe Docket: 17-40873 Opinion Date: January 4, 2019 Judge: Edith H. Jones Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law After Laura S. was killed shortly after returning to Mexico, her representatives filed suit under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S. Ct. 1999 (1971), against a US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent and his supervisor. In this case, Laura entered the country illegally, was detained in CBP custody, and subsequently signed a form indicating her decision to repatriate voluntarily. Plaintiffs alleged that Laura was coerced into signing the voluntary removal form and was denied her due process rights, causing her death. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendants, holding that special factors precluded the extension of a Bivens remedy to this new context. The court also held that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity where the agent's conduct was not objectively unreasonable. Read Opinion Louisiana records law only for state citizens, Landry says www.wbrz.com/news/louisiana-records-law-only-for-state-citizens-landry-says/ US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Ironshore Europe DAC v. Schiff Hardin, LLP Docket: 18-40101 Opinion Date: January 2, 2019 Judge: W. Eugene Davis Areas of Law: Legal Ethics Law firm Schiff Hardin challenged the denial of its Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the complaint and rejection of its attorney immunity defense in an action alleging negligent misrepresentation. The Fifth Circuit held that the district court erred in rejecting the firm's attorney immunity defense because the conduct sued on occurred during the representation of the firm's client. Accordingly, the court reversed the district court's denial of the firm's motion and rendered judgment dismissing the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Read Opinion |
Louisiana Law BlogLouisiana Law, News, Issues and Comments from Attorneys at the Shoultz Law Firm Archives
October 2024
Categories |