
Category Archives: Court Case
Narrow Majority Largely Upholds Texas Redistricting Plan Against Gerrymandering Challenge
Abbott v. Perez presented the third opportunity for the Court to address gerrymandering claims under the Voter Rights Act, this time examining plans approved by the Texas legislature in 2013 that were largely in accordance with interim plans created by a three-judge Texas court. The 2013 plans evolved from earlier 2011 plans that did not meet with any court’s ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Gerrymandering, Redistricting, Abbott v. Perez, Voter Rights Act
Supreme Court Has Appellate Jurisdiction To Hear Appeals From The Court Of Appeals For The Armed Forces
There are a separate series of trial and appellate military courts that address criminal charges against service members, capped by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). After Keanu Ortiz was convicted of possession and distributing child pornography, he appealed to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA). Colonel Martin Mitchell was part of the panel of ... Read More
Defendant Who Consents To Separate Trials Not Subject To Double Jeopardy
After Michael Currier was indicted for burglary, grand larceny, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, he opted for separate trials, doing burglary and grand larceny first, unlawful possession second. He was concerned that his prior convictions for burglary and larceny, which would help prove the unlawful possession charge, would prejudice the jury’s consideration of his current ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Separate Trials, Double Jeopardy, Currier v. Virginia
Government Needs A Warrant To Obtain Cell-Site Records To Track Suspect’s Movements
When the FBI suspected that Timothy Carpenter was involved in several robberies, it identified his cell phone number and obtained cell-site information from his wireless carriers without a warrant, which could be used to track the movement of his phone, and thus Carpenter himself. Carpenter moved to suppress the information as violating the Fourth Amendment’s requirement for a warrant supported ... Read More
Patent Act Permits Recovery Of Lost Profits From Foreign Patent Infringement
In WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., WesternGeco sued ION for patent infringement under the Patent Act for creating an identical ocean floor surveying system that ION assembled overseas from parts made in America. A jury awarded WesternGeco damages and lost profits. ION moved to set aside the lost profits since it argued the Patent Act did not ... Read More
Removal Notice Must Specify Time And Place Of Proceeding To Stop Ten-Year Period To Cancel Removal Proceedings
Once a nonpermanent resident has been in the U.S. for a ten-year continuous period, they can cancel removal proceedings under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. That period is stayed if the resident receives a written notice to appear that specifies a time and place for the removal proceedings during the ten year period. A ... Read More
Securities And Exchange Commission Administrative Law Judges Are “Officers Of The United States” Under Appointments Clause
The Constitution’s Appointments Clause sets forth certain requirements for appointing “Officers of the United States,” who are more than mere employees of the federal government. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) utilizes Administrative Law Judges (ALJ) to adjudicate administrative proceedings involving violations of securities laws. Those ALJs are not appointed in accordance with the Appointments Clause. When Raymond Lucia was ... Read More
Stock Options Are Not Money Remuneration Under The Railroad Retirement Tax Act Of 1937
To support the nation’s ailing railroad systems, Congress passed the Railroad Retirement Tax Act in 1937 to bolster railroad employee pensions based on their “compensation,” which was defined as “any form of money remuneration.” Previously, the exception was used to exclude traditional perks like food, lodging, and tickets, but railroads recently began offering stock options. The lower courts split ... Read More
Court Permits States To Impose Sales Taxes On Online Retailers Under The Commerce Clause
In prior cases going back to 1992, the Court had ruled that the Commerce Clause precluded States from imposing sales taxes on sellers who did not maintain a physical presence in the State. But then the Internet exploded, and online retailers like Amazon regularly sell products in the various States while eluding sales taxes. In South Dakota v. Wayfair, ... Read More
Nurses Qualify to Testify about Causation
In Frausto v. Yakima HMA, LLC, 393 P.3d 776 (Wash. 2017) the court held that an Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) could qualify to provide causation testimony in a pressure ulcer case. The court based its holding, at least in part, on the Washington state statute empowering ARNPs to diagnose illnesses. The court noted that a majority of ... Read More
Court Upholds District Court Judge’s Explanation For A Sentencing Modification
A criminal drug offender was originally sentenced to 135 months’ imprisonment after the Sentencing Guidelines provided a range of 135 to 168 months. The U.S. Sentencing Commission thereafter revised the range for the same crime to 108 to 135 months. The defendant moved the district court to modify his sentence accordingly. The judge lowered the sentence to 114 months, not ... Read More
Courts Of Appeals Are Obligated To Correct Plain Sentencing Guideline Errors Under Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 52(b)
Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b), a court of appeals “should exercise its discretion to correct” an error in the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines if the error “seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” In Rosales-Mireles v. United States, after the defendant was sentenced under a miscalculation under the Sentencing Guidelines ... Read More
Court Denies Injunctive Relief In Maryland Gerrymandering Case
In Benisek v. Lamone, several Republican voters filed suit in 2017 challenging Maryland’s 2011 redrawing of its Sixth District as being gerrymandered against their constitutional rights. Those voters moved for a preliminary injunction in the district court, to allow the creation of a new districting map. The district court denied that relief and stayed the proceedings pending the decision ... Read More
Plaintiffs Lacked Standing To Bring Gerrymandering Claims
In Gill v. Whitford, twelve Democratic voters brought claims arguing that the redrawing of Wisconsin’s districts after the 2010 census was an unconstitutional gerrymandering that made it harder for Democratic candidates to get elected. Specifically, the redrawing allegedly “cracked” Democratic voters into other districts where they could not reap a majority, and “packed” Democratic voters into a few districts ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Standing, Gerrymandering, Gill v. Whitford
Court Permits First Amendment Retaliation Claim Against Municipality Despite Probable Cause To Arrest
Fane Lozman was something of a political gadfly to the City of Riviera Beach’s city council, and had filed a lawsuit against it. During a closed meeting, one of the council members suggested that the council “intimidate” Mr. Lozman, which the council supported. At a subsequent public meeting, when Lozman sought to discuss the recent arrest of a former county ... Read More
Contracts Clause Permits Retroactive Minnesota Law Changing Life Insurance Beneficiaries
In Sveen v. Melin, Mark Sveen purchased a life insurance policy naming his wife, Kaye Melin, as the primary beneficiary, and his two children from a prior marriage as contingent beneficiaries, in 1998. In 2002, Minnesota enacted a law under which a divorce automatically removed a spouse as a beneficiary from such a policy. Sveen and Melin divorced in ... Read More
TAGGED: Contracts Clause, Life Insurance, Sveen v. Melin
Court Limits Tolling Of Statute Of Limitations In Class Actions To Future Filers
Under prior Court precedent, when a class action is filed but then fails to gain certification, the statute of limitations is tolled for those within the putative class, allowing them to intervene as individual plaintiffs in that action, or bring an individual suit. In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, instead of bringing a separate individual suit or intervening, the ... Read More
Closely Divided Court Upholds Ohio Law Maintaining Voter Rolls
Under Ohio law, when a voter fails to vote for two years, the state sends the nonvoter a postage prepaid return card to verify his or her address. Voters who do not return the card and do not vote in any election for four more years are then presumed to have moved and are removed from the voting rolls. In ... Read More
Court Dismisses As Moot Lawsuit Over Unlawful Immigrant’s Abortion
When a pregnant minor unlawful immigrant sought to get an abortion while in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the Office’s policy prohibited her from getting an abortion without the Director’s permission. The minor moved for a temporary restraining order of the policy, which the district court granted. The minor then attended preabortion counseling as required under Texas ... Read More
TAGGED: scotus, Dismisses As Moot, Abortion, Azar v. Garza
Criminal Defendants Sentenced Under Mandatory Minimums Not Entitled To Relief Under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3582(c)(2)
In Koons v. United States, after several criminal defendants pleaded guilty to drug conspiracy charges, the district court discovered that the mandatory minimum sentence provided under 21 U.S.C. sec. 841(b)(1) was higher than the sentencing range provided under the Sentencing Guidelines. The district court decided that the mandatory minimums trumped the Guidelines, and sentenced the defendants under that range, ... Read More
Court Permits Bankruptcy Discharge Despite Oral Misrepresentation Over Ability To Pay Legal Bill
When R. Scott Appling fell behind in paying his legal bills, he orally told his attorneys that he would repay them with a tax refund he was expecting to get. When he got the (lower than expected) refund, he used it to pay other expenses instead, lying to his attorneys so they would continue with the representation. After the attorneys ... Read More
Court Resolves Confusion In Certain Plea Agreements, Holds They Are Subject To Sentencing Guidelines
In 2011, the Court had to decide whether a criminal defendant who entered into a plea deal under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) could petition to reduce his or her sentence under 18 U.S.C. sec. 3582(c)(2) (which permits a reduction upon a change in the Sentencing Guidelines) if the Sentencing Guidelines were later amended to lower the sentencing range ... Read More
Court Sides With Baker Who Refused To Bake Custom Cake For Gay Wedding
When Jack Phillips refused, on religious grounds, to make a custom wedding cake for a gay couple, the couple filed a charge with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission alleging the refusal violated Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act. Phillips maintained he had a First Amendment right to refuse to bake the cake, but the Commission found him in violation of the Act and ... Read More
Private Investigations Not Compensated Under Mandatory Victims Restitution Act
The Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 requires defendants convicted of certain federal offenses to reimburse victims for “lost income and necessary child care, transportation, and other expenses incurred during participation in the investigation or prosecution of the offense or attendance at proceedings related to the offense.” 18 U.S.C. sec. 3663A(b)(4). When Sergio Lagos defrauded a lender for tens of ... Read More
Police Cannot Search Vehicle Within Curtilage Of A Home Without A Search Warrant
The Fourth Amendment has long required that any police officer entering the curtilage of a home to have a search warrant. However, the Fourth Amendment also has an “automobile exception,” permitting warrantless searches of vehicles due to their ready mobility. In Collins v. Virginia, a police officer entered the curtilage of a home (its driveway) without a warrant to ... Read More
Private Arbitration Agreements Preclude Employee Class Actions
In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, employees sued their employer in a class action for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Those employees each had signed an agreement to arbitrate employment disputes under the Federal Arbitration Act, and the employer invoked those agreements to preclude the class actions. The employees argued that the National Labor Relations Act triggered ... Read More
Prior Precedents Did Not Preclude Tribal Sovereign Immunity In A Property Dispute
After the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe purchased a 40-acre parcel of land in Washington State, a survey of that parcel revealed that approximately an acre of it lay on the other side of a boundary fence, which the Tribe’s new neighbors, the Lundgrens, believed they had owned for decades. The Lundgrens file a quiet title action, and the Tribe asserted ... Read More
Complaints Of Use Of Full Restraints Moot After Criminal Cases Ended
A group of criminal defendants challenged the policy of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, which permitted officers to put in-custody defendants in full restraints for nonjury proceedings in court. The district court denied the claims, but while the appeal before the Ninth Circuit was pending all of the cases involving those defendants resolved. The ... Read More
Drivers Have A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy In A Car Rented By Another
In Byrd v. United States, Terrence Byrd was pulled over while driving a car rented by Latasha Reed, although the rental agreement did not list Byrd as an authorized driver. The police searched Byrd’s car and discovered 49 bricks of heroin in the trunk. Byrd moved to suppress the evidence as fruits of an unlawful search, but the district ... Read More
Court Rejects Facial-Insufficiency Challenge To Overbroad Wiretap Orders
A federal judge is only authorized to issue a wiretap order for wiretaps conducted within his or her jurisdiction. In Dahda v. United States, a Kansas federal judge issued wiretap orders authorizing wiretaps in Kansas, but also contained language permitting wiretaps in Missouri. Federal investigators conducted the wiretaps in Missouri, and the evidence they gathered led to Los and ... Read More