Blackman v. Davis

Docket: 16-11820
Opinion Date: November 28, 2018
Judge: Edith H. Jones
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Blackman was convicted of murder in 1998 and sentenced to life imprisonment. In a successive Section 2255 application, she challenged her conviction under Brady v. Maryland, Napue v. Illinois, and Giglio v. United States. The claim was based on the inconsistency between a detectives trial testimony that a witness had positively identified Blackman in the lineup and the prosecutor’s note indicating hesitation. The district court dismissed the petition. The Fifth Circuit affirmed. The petition did not fulfill the stringent requirements of 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)(2)(B). Even if Blackman could establish that she exercised due diligence in discovering the basis for her claims, the newly discovered evidence, taken together with the proof adduced at trial, does not show “by clear and convincing evidence” that, but for the prosecution’s misconduct, “no reasonable factfinder would have found her guilty” of murder. The district court was not authorized to grant a certificate of appealability on the merits of Blackman’s claims while also determining that her petition ultimately failed to meet the statutory prerequisites for a successive try at federal habeas relief.

Read Opinion

Smith v. Chrysler Group, L.L.C.

Docket: 17-40901
Opinion Date: November 26, 2018
Judge: E. Grady Jolly
Areas of Law: Personal Injury, Products Liability

Smith was killed while driving a 2013 Jeep Wrangler, manufactured by Chrysler. Days after the crash, Chrysler sent out a Recall Notice: the transmission oil cooler (TOC) tube of some 2012 and 2013 Wranglers might leak, which could cause a fire in the underbody of the vehicle. Smith’s Jeep was never inspected for the defect before his accident and the wrecked Jeep was not preserved for a post-accident inspection. Days after the crash, the scene of the accident was photographed, showing what appears to be charred grass along the path Smith’s Jeep traveled after leaving the road. Smith’s family sued, asserting strict products liability, negligence, breach of warranty, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, claiming that the recall defect caused a fire in the Jeep's underbody, filling the passenger compartment with carbon monoxide, so that Smith lost consciousness and ran off the road. The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Chrysler. The court properly excluded a supplemental report by plaintiff’s expert, which failed adequately to connect newly disclosed information and conclusions that Smith’s Jeep had a defect and that the alleged defect caused a fire. Even if there was a defect, there was no evidence that it caused a fire in Smith’s Jeep or that the fire caused the crash. The court upheld an award of costs to Chrysler, despite plaintiffs’ “impoverished condition.”

Read Opinion

US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Doe v. Marine-Lombard

Docket: 17-30292
Opinion Date: November 16, 2018
Judge: Leslie H. Southwick
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law

The Fifth Circuit denied a petition for rehearing en banc; treated the petition for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing; and granted the petition for panel rehearing. The court withdrew its prior opinion and substituted the following opinion. Three exotic dancers under the age of 21 filed suit challenging Louisiana's amendment of two statutes (Act No. 395) that required entertainers on premises licensed to serve alcohol and whose breasts or buttocks are exposed to view be 21 years of age or older. The district court concluded that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that the Act was unconstitutionally overbroad and vague, and issued a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the Act. The court vacated the injunction and held that the district court erred in holding that the Act was overbroad, either for the lack of narrow tailoring necessary under United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367, 376 (1968), or for "substantial overbreadth" under such cases as Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 612 (1973). Determining that plaintiffs had standing to bring their vagueness claim, the court held that the Act survived a facial challenge for vagueness. The court explained that it was enough that the Act required the full coverage of commonly understood anatomical terms. Accordingly, the court remanded for further proceedings.

Read Opinion

US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
Dunster Live, LLC v. LoneStar Logos Management Co.

Docket: 17-50873
Opinion Date: November 13, 2018
Judge: Costa
Areas of Law: Business Law, Intellectual Property, Legal Ethics

Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, a defendant is not eligible for fees when the plaintiff obtains a dismissal without prejudice because such a dismissal does not establish the winner of the dispute. The Fifth Circuit held that taking the lead early in the lawsuit did not make defendants eligible for fees, nor did the trial court's postponement of the litigation when it allowed plaintiff to dismiss the federal suit without prejudice. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's denial of fees.

Read Opinion

US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Graves

Docket: 17-11276
Opinion Date: November 8, 2018
Judge: Oldham
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's imposition of a $5,000 special assessment and held that 18 U.S.C. 3014 allows the district courts to consider defendant's future earning capacity when determining whether a defendant is indigent. In this case, the district court found defendant non-indigent based on evidence that he took accelerated placement courses in high school, obtained his GED, and briefly attended college; had a wide range of vocational skills; had a long history of employment; had previously earned $40,000 annually; and was able bodied.

Read Opinion

'Jim Crow's Last Stand' In Louisiana May Fall To Ballot Measure

www.npr.org/2018/11/04/663522243/jim-crow-s-last-stand-in-louisiana-may-fall-to-ballot-measure

US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Lewis

Docket: 17-50526
Opinion Date: November 1, 2018
Judge: Jerry E. Smith
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit vacated defendant's conviction for count 23 -- possession, use, and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence (brandishing) -- where both parties agreed that under United States v. Davis, 903 F.3d 483, 484–86 (5th Cir. 2018), defendant's conviction of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery (count 1) could not serve as the underlying crime of violence predicate for his initial count 23 conviction. The court also held that, because the conviction affected his sentence, the sentence must be vacated and remanded for resentencing.

Read Opinion

US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Opinions
United States v. Gonzalez

Docket: 17-40895
Opinion Date: October 31, 2018
Judge: Per Curiam
Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. The court held that there was ample evidence introduced at trial by which a jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant was involved in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine; the evidence was sufficient to find that he was involved with, or should have reasonably foreseen that he was involved with, a conspiracy to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine; and the district court did not err in relying on the jury's finding of drug quantity when imposing the sentence.

Read Opinion