Appellee Luis Aquino was first noticed by police officers at a Greyhound rest stop in Omaha, Nebraska. As passengers were being questioned in search of contraband, Aquino appeared nervous and the officers decided to question him, eventually taking him off the bus to search his bags. As officers searched his bags, he was asked if they could search his person. Aquino responded that he did not want officers to touch him....
Does federal common law or state law provide the meaning of “arbitration” within the Federal Arbitration Act? According to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Congress intended national uniformity regarding the interpretation of the term “arbitration,” and therefore federal common law controls. This issue cropped up in an insurance contract dispute between Imad John Bakoss and Lloyds of London. (Yes, that Lloyds of London. The insurance company that insures celebrity body parts....
The plot is surely thickening in the Mueller secret grand jury subpoena matter against the undisclosed foreign corporation. SCOTUS just terminated the temporary stay that was issued on an emergency basis in favor of the mystery foreign corporation pending the Justices holding a conference on whether to take the matter up. Making matters a bit more interesting, it seems that the undisclosed corporation has also filed a petition seeking permission to seek writ in a filing under seal....
Muscogee (Creek) Nation v. Okla. Tax. Comm., No. 09-5123, concerned an action by an Indian tribe challenging Oklahoma’s seizure of cigarettes failing to bear a tax stamp from the tribe. The court of appeals affirmed the dismissal of the action on the ground that sovereign immunity barred plaintiff’s claims because plaintiff, in effect, sought to render nugatory, via the Fourth Amendment, the state’s cigarette tax enforcement scheme as an affront to Indian sovereignty....
Here’s something you don’t see – well, ever? A cadre of ex-government prosecutors, including 20 former Justice Department officials, has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court accusing current federal prosecutors of violating the Constitution by withholding evidence regarding a key witness. The claims made in the brief aren’t in themselves uncommon, but it’s unprecedented to see them made by former federal prosecutors against their current-prosecutor colleagues in the Justice Department....
Judge William Fletcher followed in the footsteps of his honorable mother once again. He delivered the James Madison Lecture at New York University School of Law, speaking out against the death penalty, nine years after his mother, the late Judge Betty Binns Fletcher spoke about the death penalty in her own Madison Lecture. Both Judge Fletchers served on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, with the liberal Judge Betty Fletcher taking senior status as part of a 1998 deal with Republican senators, in exchange for a confirmation of her son to the bench....
Lawyers have to listen to their clients, especially when it comes to pleading guilty. That’s basically what the U.S. Supreme Court said in State of Louisiana v. McCoy. In that triple-murder case, Robert McCoy told his lawyer he didn’t do it. His attorney chose a different strategy, however, and McCoy wound up on death row. Lucky for him though, with the recent Supreme Court decision in his favor, he gets a new trial, but that’s only because he’s still alive....
Maybe it’s time that you criminal defense attorneys – particularly when representing immigrants – wear badges that say: “You may be deported if you are convicted.” That’s because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that criminal defense attorneys have a duty to inform clients about possible immigration consequences of pleading guilty. It’s required to provide effective counsel under the Sixth Amendment, the High Court said seven years ago in Padilla v. Kentucky....
In an action seeking relief under the “bailout” provision in Section 4(a) of the Voting Rights Act, which allows a “political subdivision” to be released from the preclearance requirements if certain conditions are met, the dismissal of the complaint is reversed where the Act must be interpreted to permit all political subdivisions, including Plaintiff district, to seek to bail out from the preclearance requirements. Read Northwest Austin Mun. Utility Dist. No....
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals granted Joseph Collins a new trial today, finding that a U.S. District Judge Robert Patterson committed prejudicial error when he failed to disclose the contents of a jury note and engaged in an ex-parte colloquy with a juror accused of attempting to barter his vote. Collins was convicted of conspiracy, securities fraud, and wire fraud, and sentenced to seven years for his alleged role in a Refco, Inc....
Raisins are sometimes known as nature’s candy, but they’re unlikely to be called free-market fodder. The healthy snack is a “heavily regulated” agricultural commodity under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act (AMAA) of 1937. Not that everyone is on board with such regulation. The Supreme Court will consider a federal foray into raisin price-stabilization this term. On Tuesday, the Court granted certiorari in Horne, et al., v. U.S. Department of Agriculture....
The Supreme Court wasn’t solely focused on the Affordable Care Act arguments this week, even if the rest of the country could speak of nothing else. The Court also released five opinions, including three that we didn’t cover on Wednesday because we, (like everyone else), could speak of nothing but Medicaid and severability. In split decisions, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit in FAA v. Cooper (quel surprise!), affirmed the Fifth Circuit in Setser v....
US v. Pierce, 09-3865, concerned a challenge to the district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress, in a conviction of defendant for possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine. In affirming, the court held that the narcotics dog’s interior sniffs, as a natural migration from his initial exterior sniffs, did not constitute a search requiring a warrant or probable cause. PA Prison Soc’y v. Cortes, 09-3017, involved plaintiffs’ constitutional challenge to a 1997 amendment to Article IV, section 9(a) of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, that alters the voting procedures employed by the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons to require unanimity in recommending pardons and commutations for life-sentenced prisoners to the Governor....
Appeal from Restitution Orders In US v. Bengis, No. 07-4895, the government’s appeal from two orders denying its applications for a restitution award in favor of the Republic of South Africa, pursuant to, first, the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA), and second, the Victim and Witness Protection Act (VWPA), the court vacated the orders where 1) had a property interest in rock lobsters unlawfully harvested from its waters by defendants; and 2) was a victim, as defined by the MVRA and VWPA, eligible to receive restitution....
In US v. Edwards, No. 08-30055, the government appealed from a sentence of probation and restitution imposed on defendant, who pled guilty to bankruptcy fraud and making a false statement to a bank. Defendant cross-appealed the restitution order on the ground that it was barred by collateral estoppel. As stated in the decision: defendant “filled out a loan application in Montana and indicated that he had significant assets,” but “did not disclose the $3 million FDIC obligation arising from his [prior] Arizona conviction....
Defendant’s drug distribution sentence following a guilty plea is affirmed where: 1) the agreement and the plea colloquy put the defendant on notice that the Pimentel drug quantity estimate was not binding on the prosecutor and that if the estimate was wrong, the plea could not be withdrawn; and 2) there was no authority that prevented a sentencing judge from using facts of the offense conduct both to determine the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range and to select a sentence within that range....
Sentence for drug crimes is affirmed where the district court properly found that defendant was not eligible for a sentence reduction as his sentence as a career offender under U.S.S.G. sec. 4B1.1 was not based on a sentencing range that was subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission. Read US v. Martinez, No. 08-3454 Appellate InformationAppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.Argued: June 18, 2009Decided: July 13, 2009...
In 2008, a conflict between a police officer and an autistic 21-year-old man came to a tragic end when the officer shot and killed Mohammad Usman Chaudhry. Officer Joseph Cruz initially claimed self-defense, that Chaudhry had come at him with a knife. But the evidence all pointed to a case of excessive force. That case, along with many other allegations, led to a $1.7 million verdict against Cruz and the City of Los Angeles, but a federal district judge nixed $1 million in damages for excessive force based on the victim’s pain and suffering, as such awards are not allowed under California state law....
California v. Safeway, Inc., No. 08-55671, concerned an antitrust action challenging a profit-sharing provision between members of a multiemployer bargaining unit. The court reversed the denial of summary judgment to plaintiff on the ground that a profit sharing agreement that would ordinarily violate the antitrust laws was not excused from compliance under the nonstatutory labor exemption because it constituted an economic weapon used by the employers in their efforts to prevail in a labor dispute....
When it comes to the Supreme Court, all eyes are on the Senate this week, as the battle over Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation plays out. But just across the street, the work of the Court continues uninterrupted. Yesterday, the Court issued two opinions – one regarding EEOC subpoenas, the other on sentencing for drug offenses – and granted cert in two new cases. Here’s a quick roundup, in case you need a break from all the Senatorial drama....
