Posts

Saranchak v. Beard, 08-9000, concerned a challenge to the district court’s partial grant of defendant’s petition for habeas relief from the first degree murder conviction of his grandmother and uncle and a sentence of death. In reversing, the court held that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s rejection of the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the counsel’s failure seek suppression of certain statements was not an unreasonable application of, or contrary to, clearly established federal law....

In Hamilton v. Palm, No. 09-3676, a diversity negligence action, alleging that plaintiff fell and was seriously injured doing roofing work and constructing an addition on property owned by defendants, the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint is reversed where the district court made an unwarranted extension of the pleading standards of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009)....

In Sala v. US, No. 08-1333, an action seeking a tax refund, the court of appeals reversed the district court’s order granting the refund, holding that the transaction giving rise to petitioner’s claimed tax loss had no economic substance because the claimed loss generated by the program was structured from the outset to be a complete fiction. US v. Pope, No. 09-4150, involved a prosecution for possessing a firearm while having been previously convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence....

In a case that pitted religious freedom versus anti-discrimination laws, the U.S. Supreme Court came down unanimously, but narrowly, on the side of religious freedom June 17. The court ruled that the city of Philadelphia cannot exclude a Catholic organization from its foster-care program because the program won’t accept same-sex couples. The agency, Catholic Social Services (CSS), argued that its religious views kept it from screening same-sex couples as foster parents....

In a petition for review of the BIA’s denial of petitioner’s application for a hardship waiver of the joint petition requirement for permanent residence, the petition is denied where: 1) the BIA considered hardship to all the family members discussed in petitioner’s testimony; 2) because petitioner was a former permanent resident who lacked conditional status when he filed his second and third petitions requesting hardship waivers, he had no status to extend; and 3) even if the immigration judge erred in evaluating the evidence concerning hardship, his errors were rendered harmless by the BIA’s de novo review....

Involuntary Medication Order Affirmed In US v. Nicklas, No. 09-3784, the court affirmed the district court order that defendant be involuntarily medicated in order to restore his competency to stand trial, holding that 1) because of the intertwined nature of defendant’s mental disease and his crimes, it was reasonable for the government to presume defendant may persist in committing similar offenses, and the government had an important interest in preventing recidivism; and 2) because of the relationship between defendant’s alleged crime and his mental disease, and because of his prior conviction on similar charges, the government also had a substantial interest in seeking a sentence of supervised release....

The Tenth Circuit has reversed a defendant’s convictions on all counts in a recent health care fraud case. In a joint trial, a jury initially convicted defendants Olalekan Rufai and Adedayo Adegboye, which the Tenth Circuit then ultimately reversed for Rufai, in a 38-page opinion, as reported by The Oklahoman. Rufai and Adegboye initially had both incorporated and set up a durable medical equipment (power wheelchairs and power scooters, in particular) provider called First Century Medical Supply....

When President Vladimir Putin ordered an invasion of Ukraine at the end of February, many multinational companies either decided to end their business in Russia or were forced to do so from the sweeping sanctions imposed by several countries. International law firms have recently joined this movement, severing ties with Russian clients and closing their offices in the country. Navigating the Sanctions Various countries, as well as the European Union, have imposed numerous sanctions against Russia since the invasion....

A recent move from the California legislature is making it look very likely that the most recently proposed budget, which needs to be passed in just a few days, will include a provision to provide qualifying undocumented immigrants between the ages of 19 and 26 with the opportunity to sign up for and receive Medi-Cal. California, along with a handful of other states, already provides health care to undocumented minors with a demonstrated need....

We’re often told that life is all about choices. Should I stay or should I go? Leave the gun, take the cannoli. Red pill, blue pill. But pop culture also gives us faith that it’s possible to have the best of both worlds. (See Hannah Montana, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the 2002 Jay-Z/R.Kelley collaboration.) Which school of thought applies to judges? That’s a question for the New Jersey Supreme Court....

The Remington class-action settlement over defective rifle triggers probably took longer to hammer out than it took to make the rifles. Four years after the original settlement, a federal appeals court finally approved a fourth version of the agreement in Pollard v. Remington Arms Company. The U.S. Eighth Circuit affirmed the deal making some gun owners eligible for trigger replacements and others for a $12 voucher. The main settlement terms were not the problem; it was the notice to about 7....

The U.S. Supreme Court stayed a controversial lower court order that would have required North Carolina to rework congressional voting districts. As a result, the Republican-dominated districts will likely stay the same for at least another election. For opponents, the stay was justice delayed. They also say it is troubling because the lower court concluded that North Carolina discriminated against voters. Equal Protection In Common Cause v. Rucho, the US. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled the election boundaries violated equal protection laws by diluting non-Republican votes....

US v. Sed, No. 09-1489, involved a challenge to the district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress in a conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possession with the intent to distribute drugs and other related crimes, claiming that the Pennsylvania police violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they arrested him in Ohio and that the district court erred in failing to reduce his sentence because of “sentencing entrapment” or “sentencing factor manipulation....

Nicaraguan citizens’ petition for review of BIA’s dismissal of their application for adjustment status affirmed Delgado-Sobalvarro v. Attorney General, 08-1679, concerned a Nicaraguan citizens’ petition for review of the BIA’s dismissal of their application for adjustment status. In denying the petition, the court held that the petitioners are not eligible to adjust status under section 245 on the basis of their section 236 conditional parole as a conditional parole under section 236 does not constitute parole into the United States for the purposes of adjustment of status under section 245....

In a class action against the Oklahoma Department of Human Services claiming that the department’s agency-wide foster care policies and practices exposed all class members to an impermissible risk of harm, the district court’s order certifying a class is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs presented more than conclusory statements that defendants’ agency-wide monitoring policies and practices, or lack thereof, created a risk of harm shared by the entire class; 2) due to the common risk of harm and the common underlying legal theory for asserting that risk, the district court acted within its discretion to find that typicality was satisfied; and 3) the injunction sought by plaintiffs applied to the proposed class as a whole without requiring differentiation between class members....

In US v. Lewis, No. 09-3804, the court affirmed defendant’s firearm possession conviction, holding that defendant voluntarily consented to the police’s entry into defendant’s girlfriend’s apartment, and thus the district court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress the firearm at issue. Siefert v. Alexander, No. 09-1713, concerned an action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the members of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, challenging under the First Amendment certain judicial ethical rules....

Isn’t it annoying when you have to reboot a brand new computer because it crashed before you even started your first project? Welcome to Google’s world. The company organized an advisory group to develop artificial intelligence, and it already has to start over. The Advanced Technology External Advisory Council is supposed to advise the company on subjects like facial recognition and bias in machine learning. The problem is the council is already blowing up....

Bhargava v. Attorney General, 08-3348, concerned an Indian citizen’s petition for review of the BIA’s affirmance of an IJ’s denial of petitioner’s motion to terminate removal proceedings and to certify his case to the BIA. In denying the petition, the court held that the Board’s affirmance of the IJ’s decision finding that it lacked jurisdiction to review DHS’s termination of petitioner’s asylum status was not arbitrary or capricious or plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation at issue....

Marriage equality could be heading to the Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced on Tuesday that it has denied en banc rehearing in Perry v. Brown, the case challenging the constitutionality of California Proposition 8. The ballot initiative, approved by California voters in 2008, banned same-sex marriage in the Golden State, setting off years of litigation. Prop 8 supporters have vowed to bring their case to the Supreme Court, reports the Mercury News, but will the Supreme Court agree to hear it?...

The Supreme Court’s first opinion of 2017 was released today, a summary ruling in case involving a New Mexico police officer who shot and killed a gun-wielding man without giving a prior warning. Reversing the Tenth Circuit, the Supreme Court found that the officer’s behavior violated no clearly established constitutional rights and thus he was entitled to qualified immunity. The brief, per curiam opinion also contained a warning to the Tenth and other circuits: stick to the narrow confines of clearly established law in qualified immunity cases or risk being overturned....