End of Day:

More:

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-30/C:16-3430:J:Wood:dis:T:fnOp:N:2210484:S:0

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171382P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/171914P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172724P.pdf

http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/18/08/172726P.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/30/16-71933.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/30/16-35991.pdf

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/08/30/15-73603.pdf

http://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201710944.pdf

-CB
.

Seventh Circuit: Milton v. Boughton

Although the evidence from the uncounseled lineup was not properly admissible, petitioner was not prejudiced from the admission, given the other eyewitness identifications.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-30/C:17-1910:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:fnOp:N:2210678:S:0
.
~ ,

Seventh Circuit: Anthony Kaminski v. Nancy Berryhill

Panel rehearing order with request for edited opinion by agency head.


 http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D08-30/C:17-3314:J:PerCuriam:aut:T:orCo:N:2210668:S:0
.

Sixth Circuit: United States v. Kurt Mallory

Court did not abuse its discretion in finding that a witness was unavailable, since although the medical records were old, they indicated chronic conditions, and while the witness was earlier produced to the courtroom from the local jail, he was home-bound at the time of the trial.

No Confrontation Clause issue where the evidence that emerged after the deposition of the later-unavailable witness might have been presented at trial to attack the witness' credibility.

Although handwriting analysis does not have significant empirical support, it is a field of specialized expertise that might be useful to the finder of fact.  

Error for judge to weigh motion to set aside the verdict as an objective question of sufficiency of the evidence, as the correct question was whether the judge subjectively understood the verdict to be against the weight of the evidence.



.
~ ,

Sixth Circuit: League of Women Voters of Mich. v. Ruth Johnson

Elected representatives' interest in preserving relationships with their constituents merited permission to intervene in a redistricting action, as the interest was distinct from the interests represented by the other plaintiffs.  In appellate review of the decision to deny permissive intervention, the equitable factors balanced are those prevailing at the time of the original decision to deny intervention.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0194p-06.pdf
.
~ ,

Fifth Circuit: USA v. Carlos Fuentes-Canales

Although petitioner's sentence was flawed in that it counted a state statute as its generic federal equivalent, since the special verdict form required that the jury have found that either all the elements of the generic offense or all the elements of another generic offense had been met, the error in sentencing does not merit reversal for reasons of fairness or judicial integrity.

 http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-41476-CR0.pdf
.
~

Third Circuit: USA v. Jay Goldstein

En banc order.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/154094po.pdf
.

Third Circuit: USA v. Theodore Clark, III

Traffic stop was in violation of the Fourth Amendment, as the questioning into criminal history continued past the point at which the computerized driver's licence check had been completed.

 http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/172739p.pdf
.
~

First Circuit: Narragansett Indian Tribe v. RI Dep't of Transportation

Sovereign immunity bars claim arising from highway construction, as the private right of action in the Act exists only to enforce the Act, not to challenge the program-based decisions of the agency.

Federal court does not have jurisdiction over a breach of contract suit against a state unless the claim states a disputed and substantial federal issue, and prudential factors are favorable.

http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-1951P-01A.pdf
.
~ ,

First Circuit: Lemelson v. Bloomberg L.P.

News organization's pre-publication fact checking and investigation did not justify a finding of actual malice, as comment was sought from the investigating agency, and the fact that the agency's investigation centered on a company and not the plaintiff didn't make it less likely that the plaintiff was under investigation.

.
~
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)