HPD announces DWI Checkpoint in Houma on Tuesday www.houmatimes.com/news/dwi-checkpoint-in-houma-on-tuesday/
0 Comments
Louisiana Supreme Court Opinions In re: Grand Jury Subpoena Docket: 2019-KK-00962 Opinion Date: May 28, 2020 Judge: Bernette J. Johnson Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law In 2018, the target of a grand jury investigation was charged by Bill of Information with one count of molestation of a juvenile, a violation of La. R.S. 14:81.2, arising from an incident in 2003 in which he allegedly molested his children’s babysitter. The target was subsequently arrested and pled not guilty. In conjunction with the grand jury proceeding, the state issued a subpoena to the target’s wife, to appear before the grand jury. The wife filed an “Affidavit of Spouse” wherein she asserted “her lawful privilege to refuse to give evidence in any criminal proceeding against her husband, pursuant to Louisiana Code of Evidence article 505.” The Louisiana Supreme Court granted review of this matter to determine whether the spousal witness privilege in Article 505 could be invoked in a grand jury proceeding investigating the molestation of a juvenile. Because the grand jury proceeding involved an allegation and investigation of the sexual abuse of a child, the Court found the spousal privilege was abrogated by Ls. R.S. 14:403(B). The Court reversed the district court, which found the spousal privilege applied. Read Opinion Senate approves bill to make medical marijuana more widely available; bill lifts regulations requiring doctors to register with the state www.houmatimes.com/news/senate-approves-bill-to-make-medical-marijuana-more-widely-available-bill-lifts-regulations-requiring-doctors-to-register-with-the-state/ US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Sierra Frac Sand, LLC v. CDE Global Limited Docket: 19-40489 Opinion Date: May 26, 2020 Judge: Leslie H. Southwick Areas of Law: Civil Procedure After plaintiff filed suit for fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of contract, defendant moved to dismiss under the doctrine of forum non conveniens based on a forum-selection clause found in a document external to, but incorporated into, the parties' contract. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's enforcement of the forum-selection clause and dismissal of the complaint. The court held that the forum-selection clause was incorporated into the contract and is binding. In this case, all the forum non conveniens private-interest factors weigh in defendant's favor of litigating the case in Northern Ireland. Furthermore, there are no unusual circumstances that warrant retaining the litigation in Texas. Read Opinion Louisiana could greatly expand who can be treated with medical marijuana www.wwltv.com/article/news/health/louisiana-could-greatly-expand-who-can-be-treated-with-medical-marijuana/289-f9ac562f-a60c-4244-be8b-d01fc8e2c080 Lafourche DA’s Office Begins Phase One Re-Opening To The Public www.houmatimes.com/news/lafourche-das-office-begins-phase-one-re-opening-to-the-public/ Louisiana Supreme Court Opinions Caldwell v. St. Charles Gaming Company Docket: 2019-CC-01238 Opinion Date: January 29, 2020 Judge: Boddie Areas of Law: Admiralty & Maritime Law, Civil Procedure, Gaming Law, Labor & Employment Law, Personal Injury The Court of Appeal granted summary judgment to plaintiff St. Charles Gaming Company d/b/a Isle of Capri Casino Lake Charles ("Grand Palais"), holding the casino was a :vessel" for the purposes of general maritime law. The decision contradicted Benoit v. St. Charles Gaming Company, LLC, 233 So. 3d 615, cert. denied, 139 S. Ct. 104 (2018), which held the Grand Palais was not a vessel. Plaintiff Don Caldwell worked for Grand Palais Riverboat, LLC, and was injured when the gangway attached to the riverboat malfunctioned and collapsed. Plaintiff petitioned for damages, alleging the Grand Palais was a vessel under general maritime law, and that he was a seaman under the Jones Act at the time of the accident. After a de novo review of the record, the Louisiana Supreme Court concluded the Grand Palais was a not vessel under general maritime law. Therefore, it reversed the judgment of the court of appeal and granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing plaintiff’s suit. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Payton Docket: 19-10360 Opinion Date: May 18, 2020 Judge: Leslie H. Southwick Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's imposition of a standard condition of supervised release requiring defendant to "permit a probation officer to visit at any time at home or elsewhere and permit confiscation of any contraband observed in plain view by the probation officer." The condition was imposed after defendant pleaded guilty to interference with commerce by robbery and to brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing this condition in light of defendant's violent conduct, prior drug convictions, multiple probation violations, and failure to abide by the terms of pretrial release. Read Opinion United States v. Emordi Docket: 19-10400 Opinion Date: May 15, 2020 Judge: Leslie H. Southwick Areas of Law: Criminal Law, White Collar Crime Defendants were convicted of conspiracy to engage in Medicare and Medicaid fraud in their operation of a home healthcare business, continuing over a period of three years and causing over $3.5 million in losses. The Fifth Circuit affirmed Defendants Emordi and Isidaehomen's conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that defendants knew of and voluntarily joined the conspiracy. The court also affirmed the district court's imposition of a two-level enhancement to Defendant Okwilagwe's sentence for an offense involving 10 or more victims; affirmed an enhancement under USSG 2B1.1(b)(1)(J) for an intended loss between $3.5 million and $9.5 million; and affirmed the restitution amount. Finally, the court affirmed Defendant Etti's sentence, holding that the district court did not plainly err by imposing the below-Guidelines sentence that was substantively reasonable. Read Opinion Louisiana coronavirus reopening, Phase I: What's open and what's closed? www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/coronavirus/article_2df4bb9e-93c2-11ea-bbc2-ab0f3297b343.html US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Hicks Docket: 18-11352 Opinion Date: May 8, 2020 Judge: E. Grady Jolly Areas of Law: Criminal Law This case was remanded from the Supreme Court in light of Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191, 2200 (2019), which held that in 18 U.S.C. 922(g) prosecutions the government must prove that the defendant "knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm." The Fifth Circuit held that the district court did not err when it accepted the factual basis for defendant's guilty plea. The court agreed with the Seventh Circuit that even though due process concerns are implicated when a defendant claims that a Rehaif error rendered his guilty plea unknowing and involuntary, the defendant satisfies plain error review only if he shows that there is a reasonable probability that he would not have pled guilty had he known of Rehaif. In this case, defendant has not argued, much less shown, that he would have gone to trial if he had been informed of the knowledge of felon status requirement. Given that the facts detailed in the PSR provide ample support for the inference that defendant knew of his felon status when he possessed the firearms, the court held that defendant failed to show that the Rehaif error affected his substantial rights. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's judgment. Read Opinion Bradley v. Sheriff's Department St. Landry Parish Docket: 18-30600 Opinion Date: May 7, 2020 Judge: Priscilla Richman Owen Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law Plaintiff filed suit against the Sheriff's Department and others under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and Louisiana state law, alleging wrongful arrest, wrongful detention, and malicious prosecution. The Fifth Circuit vacated in part the district court's dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, rendering judgment in favor of each defendant on each of the federal law claims. The court held that the magistrate judge erred in concluding that, if plaintiff's section 1983 claims were barred by limitations, subject matter jurisdiction over those claims was lacking. The court held that the section 1983 claims based on wrongful or false arrest and wrongful detention were time-barred, and the court declined to apply equitable tolling to the claims. The court also held that defendant inadequately briefed his malicious prosecution claim, and dismissal of the pendant state-law claims was within the district court's discretion. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment to the extent it dismissed plaintiff's state law claims. Read Opinion 75% in attendance and many without masks: Louisiana legislature reconvenes amid coronavirus www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/coronavirus/article_3f3170d4-8e1b-11ea-8ea9-fbbffccf9893.html US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Jordan Docket: 19-40499 Opinion Date: May 1, 2020 Judge: Jennifer Walker Elrod Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of defendants' motion for a new trial on the basis of prejudicial outside influence on the jury. The court held that the district court did not abuse its broad discretion in granting the motion for a new trial without holding an evidentiary hearing. To the extent there is a bright-line rule applicable to allegations of outside influence on the jury, the court held that it was not applicable to this case. Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising its prerogative, within broadly defined parameters, to handle the allegation of outside influence in the least disruptive manner possible in this unusual case. Finally, the district court permissibly concluded that the evidence showed a sufficient likelihood of prejudice to shift the burden to the Government, and that the Government did not (and could not) show "no reasonable possibility that the jury's verdict was influenced by" the CSO's comments. Read Opinion |
Louisiana Law BlogLouisiana Law, News, Issues and Comments from Attorneys at the Shoultz Law Firm Archives
October 2024
Categories |