|
US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Porter Docket: 16-31184 Opinion Date: October 26, 2018 Judge: Jerry E. Smith Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's convictions for charges related to a murder for hire and held that defendant was competent to stand trial. The court could not say that the district court's considered decision that defendant was malingering and not presently suffering from a mental disease was "clearly arbitrary or unwarranted." Furthermore, the district court did not reversibly err in finding that defendant was competent to stand trial where he possessed both a factual and rational understanding of the proceedings. Finally, defendant's challenges to the denial of request for funding for a neuro-psychological evaluation was not properly before the court, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying motions for a continuance of the joint competency hearing, and denial of the motions for funding and a continuance did not amount to a denial of defendant's right to expert assistance. Read Opinion
0 Comments
United States v. Bowens Docket: 17-10822 Opinion Date: October 24, 2018 Judge: Jerry E. Smith Areas of Law: Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for various crimes committed during robberies of wireless-telecommunications stores in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction of using a firearm in furtherance of Hobbs Act robbery under an aiding-and-abetting theory of liability; defendant's sentence on his subsequent 18 U.S.C. 924(c) conviction was properly enhanced; and Hobbs Act robbery qualifed as a crime of violence for purposes of section 924(c). Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Hancock v. Davis Docket: 16-20662 Opinion Date: October 23, 2018 Judge: Jerry E. Smith Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of a petition for habeas corpus relief as untimely. The court held that petitioner failed to present new evidence of actual innocence under Moore v. Quarterman, 534 F.3d 454 (5th Cir. 2008), and thus he failed to make the showing necessary for this court to consider his claims despite the expired limitations period. In this case, petitioner failed to establish that affidavits supporting his claim of actual innocence were unavailable to counsel at the time of trial. Read Opinion Louisiana medical marijuana delayed after state forced to do product testing , company says www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/business/article_b05f7ca4-d6fe-11e8-b997-8ff7036b6c47.html Louisiana Might Finally Get Rid of Its Century-Old, Racist Jury System slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/louisiana-unanimous-jury-verdict-constitutional-amendment.html US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions United States v. Conner Docket: 17-11417 Opinion Date: October 22, 2018 Judge: Higginbotham Areas of Law: Civil Procedure The 60-day deadline to file a notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B) operates any time the government was a party to one of the consolidated lawsuits, even where the appeal solely concerns a different lawsuit and the government is not a party to the appeal. Defendant sought an en banc rehearing of the Fifth Circuit's decision to dismiss as time-barred his appeal of the district court's denial of his motion to vacate a second contempt order. The court treated the petition for en banc rehearing as a motion for panel reconsideration and granted the motion for reconsideration, withdrawing its prior order dismissing the appeal. The court held that United States v. Brumfield was inconsistent with its prior caselaw on the 60-day limit for him to file his notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B), and its tension with governing law grew in the face of the 2011 Rules and statutory revisions. Read Opinion Moon v. City of El Paso Docket: 17-50572 Opinion Date: October 15, 2018 Judge: Don R. Willett Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law After plaintiff was exonerated for a crime that he served seventeen years in prison for, he filed suit against various government and law enforcement personnel over his wrongful conviction and imprisonment. The Fifth Circuit held that false imprisonment was a "continuing tort" in Texas and defendant's claim was timely filed; defendant's due process claim against the county defendants was properly dismissed as time-barred; but absolute immunity barred defendant's due process claim against the prosecutor. Accordingly, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Smith v. School Board of Concordia Parish Docket: 17-30548 Opinion Date: October 15, 2018 Judge: Stephen Andrew Higginson Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Education Law A party is bound by the terms of a consent decree that it voluntarily entered. The Fifth Circuit mostly affirmed the district court's judgment finding that Delta had violated a consent decree requiring Delta to comply with a desegregation order that it had voluntarily entered into. In this case, the desegregation requirements arose out of and served to resolve a longstanding desegregation effort in Concordia Parish properly overseen by the district court; were within the scope of the case; and furthered the equal protection objectives of the original complaint. The court rejected Delta's alternative argument that the district court's order granting further relief exceeded its remedial authority. Finally, the court vacated a portion of the district court's order requiring Delta to obtain authorization before enrolling students from other parishes under separate desegregation orders. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Mejia v. Davis Docket: 17-41137 Opinion Date: October 11, 2018 Judge: Stuart Kyle Duncan Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law The Fifth Circuit vacated the district court's grant of habeas corpus ordering petitioner to be retried for killing the victim in a bar fight. The court held that the federal court failed to defer to the state court's reasonable application of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), and therefore erred in granting petitioner habeas corpus relief. The court held that, given counsel's all-or-nothing strategy, he reasonably declined a "double-edged" manslaughter instruction that could have lowered petitioner's chances of an acquittal; even assuming counsel should have sought a sudden passion instruction, it was unlikely that the instruction would have changed petitioner's sentence; and neither conclusion would have been an objectively unreasonable application of Strickland by the state habeas court. Read Opinion 50 years after Louisiana state bird's reintroduction, brown pelicans face this new threat www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/environment/article_88a5f278-c68d-11e8-bcda-77bfb6217478.html US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Barry v. Freshour Docket: 17-20726 Opinion Date: October 5, 2018 Judge: Edith Brown Clement Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Professional Malpractice & Ethics Plaintiff, a physician licensed in Texas who worked part time at the Red Bluff Clinic in California, filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, alleging violation of his Fourth Amendment rights when defendants, employees of the Texas Medical Board, executed an administrative subpoena instanter. The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal and rendered judgment for defendants. The court held that plaintiff failed to establish a cognizable interest in the subpoenaed records and thus he could not assert a Fourth Amendment claim. Read Opinion US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions Tucker v. Collier Docket: 15-41643 Opinion Date: October 3, 2018 Judge: Jennifer Walker Elrod Areas of Law: Civil Rights After officials of the TDCJ banned incarcerated adherents of the Nation of Gods and Earth from congregating together as their religion requires, plaintiff filed suit under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). The Fifth Circuit vacated the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendants, holding that the state failed to make any argument that its ban on Nation assembly did not substantially burden plaintiff's exercise of his sincere religious beliefs. The court also held that there were genuine disputes of material fact as to whether the state's ban advanced a compelling interest through the least restrictive means. The court affirmed the district court's judgment on the issue of exhaustion of plaintiff's other claims. Read Opinion |
Louisiana Law BlogLouisiana Law, News, Issues and Comments from Attorneys at the Shoultz Law Firm Archives
October 2024
Categories
|
RSS Feed