​U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Dewan v. M-I, LLC

Docket: 16-20182
Opinion Date: May 30, 2017
Judge: Leslie H. Southwick
Areas of Law: Labor & Employment Law

Plaintiffs, two oilfield workers, filed suit against their employer for unpaid overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. The district court granted summary judgment to the employer, based on the company's affirmative defense that plaintiffs fell under the administrative exemption of the FLSA. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded, holding that genuine disputes of material fact affect whether the exemption applies to plaintiffs. In this case, the limited factual record could reasonably be interpreted to provide two different understandings of the scope of plaintiffs' discretionary authority and independent judgment.

​Coleman v. Lincoln Parish Detention Center

Docket: 16-30109
Opinion Date: May 24, 2017
Judge: Per Curiam
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. 1983 pro se complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that plaintiff's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), was moot after his transfer to a different detention center; plaintiff's First Amendment claim failed because, other than not being allowed to attend Jumu'ah prayer services, he has not identified any other restrictions on his ability to express or exercise his faith; plaintiff's claims regarding the denial of medical care, negligent or deliberately indifferent infliction of injury, interference with his mail/denial of access to the courts, denial of equal protection, and retaliation were either not briefed at all or not adequately briefed; and plaintiff filed a formal motion requesting leave to file his proposed third amended complaint, and his "proposed order" accompanying that complaint did not qualify as such a motion. The court denied plaintiff's motion for a proposed settlement, and noted that the dismissal of this complaint counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Because plaintiff has at least three other strikes, he is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis.

​United States v. Westbrooks

Docket: 16-20409
Opinion Date: May 24, 2017
Judge: Costa
Areas of Law: Criminal Law, White Collar Crime

Defendant, operator of a tax preparation business, was convicted of corruptly endeavoring to obstruct the administration of the tax code and of three counts of filing fraudulent tax returns. The Fifth Circuit upheld the convictions and amount of the restitution award, but modified the judgment so the restitution obligation was limited to the supervised release term that was the only period during which restitution can be imposed for a tax offense.

BHTT Entertainment v. Brickhouse Cafe & Lounge

Docket: 16-10687
Opinion Date: May 24, 2017
Judge: Jerry E. Smith
Areas of Law: Civil Procedure

Brickhouse appealed a default judgment in a trademark dispute between the parties. The court held that it had appellate jurisdiction in this case because a motion to recall the mandate and a motion to reopen the case have the same effect; the clerk had the power to recall the mandate here; and its order reopening the case did recall the mandate. The court rejected Brickhouse's claim that service of process was invalid; held that service was unremarkable in this case; and affirmed the default judgment.

​U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Ramos-Gonzales

Docket: 16-41353
Opinion Date: May 24, 2017
Judge: Per Curiam
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Where there is no relevant evidence of drug use, the essential characteristic of a defendant that makes surveillance for drug use reasonable and appropriate is absent. Defendant appealed the district court's reimposition of a special condition of supervised release. The Fifth Circuit vacated the drug surveillance special condition, holding that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the condition on defendant where there was no record evidence that she engaged in personal drug use. The court otherwise affirmed the judgment.

​U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Frascarelli v. USPC

Docket: 16-60235
Opinion Date: May 23, 2017
Judge: Catharina Haynes
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Petitioner challenged the Commission's determination that the federal offense most analogous to defendant's crime was second-degree murder. Petitioner, an American who killed his girlfriend in Mexico, was sentenced for "qualified homicide committed with advantage" under the Baja Penal Code. Second-degree murder under United States law requires a finding that a human being was killed with malice aforethought. The Fifth Circuit held that the Commission did not clearly err in finding that defendant acted with malice when he hit his girlfriend in the face with a hammer a few times and then strangled her to death. In this case, there was scant evidence of provocation; defendant fabricated a story to deflect attention from his malicious crime; and there was evidence that the heat of passion had time to cool when defendant walked down and up a flight of stairs to obtain the hammer and then strangle the victim.

Louisiana Same-Sex Couples Denied Domestic Abuse Protections



www.usnews.com/news/best-states/louisiana/articles/2017-05-23/louisiana-same-sex-couples-denied-domestic-abuse-protections

Terrebonne Parish Council committees, May 22, 2017


​www.houmatoday.com/news/20170522/in-other-action-terrebonne-parish-council-committees-may-22-2017

United States v. Wallace

Dockets: 16-40701 , 16-40702
Opinion Date: May 22, 2017
Judge: Edith Brown Clement
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, and aiding and abetting retaliation against a witness in a crime investigation. The Fifth Circuit held that the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress, because even if the Ping Order for authorization to obtain the locations of cell site towers being accessed by a cellular device was issued in violation of federal or state law, defendant was not entitled to suppression. The court explained that suppression is not a remedy for a violation of either the federal pen-trap statute or the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. In the alternative, even if accessing prospective cell site data did constitute a Fourth Amendment search, DPS's actions were covered by the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Therefore, the court affirmed the denial of defendant's motion to suppress, and dismissed as moot defendant's request for remand for resentencing regarding his aiding and abetting conviction.

Louisiana, World Leader In Incarceration, Cannot Pay Its Public Defenders


atlantablackstar.com/2017/05/22/louisiana-world-leader-in-incarceration-cannot-pay-its-public-defenders/