Case Summaries
Criminal Law & Procedure
[07/23]
US v. Clark
Convictions for possession and conspiracy to distribute cocaine are affirmed where: 1) evidence of prior drug relationships was properly admitted; 2) evidence of the details of a physical attack in which defendants were not involved was not prejudicial; 3) a photo intended to be used to impeach a witness was properly excluded; 4) a prior statement of a witness was properly excluded as irrelevant; and 5) the prosecutor's characterization of a defendant's anticipated closing argument as a "standard" argument made by drug defendants was improper, but did not prejudice defendant.
[07/23]
Gil v. Reed
In an inmate's negligence, malpractice, and civil rights suit against prison medical staff, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where the record contained sufficient evidence to show genuine issues of material fact on: 1) inmate's Eighth Amendment claim that prison staff were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs; and 2) whether defendants had met the standard of care, using the state-law standard as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act.
[07/23]
Trotter v. Secretary, Dept. of Corrections
A sentence for robbery with a deadly weapon and first-degree murder is affirmed where 1) amendment to the statute of aggravating factors did not affect defendant's punishment; and 2) defendant is not entitled to a writ of habeas corpus based on the use of victim-impact evidence.
More...
Injury & Tort Law
[07/23]
Montano v. Chicago
In a suit seeking recovery for injuries suffered by plaintiffs in confrontations with police, dismissals of plaintiffs' claims are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court clearly erred in dismissing plaintiffs' claims with prejudice as a sanction for abuse of the judicial process; 2) judgments as a matter of law for police officers on certain claims was error as there was an evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for plaintiffs; 3) summary judgment for defendants on claims that they lacked probable cause to arrest plaintiffs for public drinking and disorderly conduct, and that they failed to intervene to prevent the use of excessive force by other officers, was proper; and 4) summary judgment for city on a liability claim under Monell was proper where plaintiffs failed to produce evidence to show deliberate indifference by the police board to constitutional violations by its officers.
[07/23]
Gil v. Reed
In an inmate's negligence, malpractice, and civil rights suit against prison medical staff, summary judgment for defendants is reversed where the record contained sufficient evidence to show genuine issues of material fact on: 1) inmate's Eighth Amendment claim that prison staff were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs; and 2) whether defendants had met the standard of care, using the state-law standard as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act.
[07/21]
Hoag v. Amex Ins. Co.
Dismissal of plaintiff's uninsured-motorist claim as a sanction for his failure to provide discovery as ordered by the trial court was neither too extreme nor an abuse of discretion where the failures were willful and repeated.
More...
Sentencing
[07/23]
US v. Jimenez
A sentence for unlawful reentry of a deported alien is affirmed where defendant's prior convictions for Unlawful Use of a Communication Facility under 21 U.S.C. section 843(b) qualify as "drug trafficking offenses" under section 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Guidelines, as reasoned in US v. Orihuela, 320 F.3d 1302, 1305 (11th Cir. 2003).
[07/23]
US v. Zastrow
A 240-month sentence for producing child pornography is affirmed over a reasonableness challenge where defendant did not identify evidence in the record indicating the district court committed a procedural error, and there was no abuse of discretion in the sentence.
[07/21]
In re Lugo
In a habeas class action on behalf of parole-eligible life prisoners involving, inter alia, efforts to reduce the backlog of parole suitability hearings, an order by the trial court in the matter is affirmed with respect to an attorney's fee award but reversed to the extent the order required the Board "not to deny further parole consideration for more than one year in the case of prisoners who have formerly been denied for one year, in the absence of a significant change in circumstances, which must be stated on the record." A separate order is reversed to the extent it related to the preparation of parole hearing transcripts or imposed penalties for the untimely preparation of such transcripts.
More...
|
