Posts

US v. Howard, 08-6143, concerned a challenge to a conviction of defendant for drug related crimes. In affirming the conviction, the court held that: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for funds to obtain a drug-dog expert; 2) because the search of the vehicle was supported by probable cause, independent of defendant’s unlawful arrest, the cash contained inside of the vehicle was properly seized; 3) facts are more than sufficient to establish probable cause that criminal activity was taking place at a second mobile home; 4) district court properly declined to suppress the evidence inside the second mobile home; 5) district court did not abuse its discretion when it sustained the government’s objection to the question put to a witness; 6) the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the government to recall an agent to testify about his 2003 encounter with defendant; 7) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial; and 8) the evidence presented at trial was more than sufficient to sustain defendant’s convictions for conspiring to possess and distribute at least five kilograms of cocaine, and for attempting to possess and distribute the drug....

Perhaps the Ninth needs a copy of Scalia and Garner’s Reading Law? Calvin Jackson had a “tumultuous decade-long romantic relationship” with the victim, which included multiple allegations of physical abuse and sexual assault. The troubles culminated in the events of the night of October 21, 1998, when Jackson surprised her at her new apartment. The defense’s theory of the case was that the victim fabricated the sexual assault in order to control the defendant....

When New Mexico decided to reform the state’s bail system, it basically destroyed the bail bond industry in the state. Unfortunately for the industry challengers that filed a proposed class action, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed with the federal district court that their challenge lacks merit and that all but one plaintiff, an individual who was denied cash-bail, lacked standing (though also had not stated a claim). Escalating matters for the challengers, one of their attorneys was sanctioned for instituting frivolous proceedings as to the clearly immune defendants....

Action Against Police for Seizing Pawnshop Property In PPS, Inc. v. Faulkner Cty., Ark., No. 09-3540, an action claiming that the police seized property from a pawn shop’s inventory without a warrant and in violation of its Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, the court affirmed summary judgment for defendant where 1) the plain view doctrine justified an officer’s seizure of an item; and 2) the district court did not need to find that the alleged victim of a theft was in fact the owner of the property before the plain view doctrine would authorize the item’s seizure....

Steven Howards can’t sue the Secret Service agents who arrested him after he expressed his disapproval for the war in Iraq to then-Vice President Dick Cheney. The Supreme Court overruled the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals prior decision in the case on Monday, holding that the agents were entitled to qualified immunity because – at the time Howards was arrested – it was not clearly established that an arrest supported by probable cause could give rise to a First Amendment violation....

Every first year law student is familiar with the pleading requirements established by Iqbal v. Ashcroft. Under Iqbal, a complaint must make facially plausible factual allegations that the defendant is liable for misconduct. For some, Iqbal is a betrayal of permissive pleading requirements; for others, it is a necessary protection against meritless litigation. That holding has been in tension with previous Supreme Court rulings on employment discrimination. Under those precedents, only minimal evidence “suggesting an inference” of discrimination is needed in pleadings....

In what may be the most dramatic twist of events this year, the Second Circuit stayed Judge Scheindlin’s injunctive order in New York City’s stop and frisk case. But, that’s not the surprising part. The Second Circuit panel, sua sponte, removed Judge Scheindlin from the case and had the action reassigned to another district judge. Oh no they didn’t … Um, oh yes, they did. Though, it may not even matter....

The Supreme Court has ruled that scientist Michael Mann, a Penn State professor best known for his “hockey stick” graph showing the increase in global temperature, can pursue his defamation claim against a conservative magazine and think tank. The case dates back to 2012 when the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) published blog posts written by Rand Simberg that compared the climate change scientist to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky. “Mann could be said to the Jerry Sandusky of climate science,” Simberg wrote, “except for instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data....

While John Oliver didn’t add a new dog to the Supreme Court when Justice Gorsuch was confirmed, the TV viewing world didn’t seem to mind that much. Oliver had his reasons apparently. And if you’re a “dog person” and fan of the Supreme Court (or vice versa), then you might want to check out the John Oliver pieces as well as the hours upon hours of YouTube videos that people have uploaded using the Last Week Tonight Supreme Court dogs dubbed to real oral arguments....

We continue our review of this week’s grants with a look at the other four cases granted cert., and while none of these possesses the star power of Raging Bull, these cases might actually be far more important than patent trolls and copyright disputes. Fundamental Fourth Amendment principles, millions of dollars worth of taxes, and compelled union dues all await the Supreme Court in this batch of four cases, likely headed for the January oral argument docket....

Fans of the Supreme Court and NPR are in for a treat. Radiolab, NPR’s science-based radio show, has its first spin off: “More Perfect.” This new podcast, which you can listen to online, takes a look at “the rarefied world of the Supreme Court to explain how cases deliberated inside hallowed halls affect lives far away from the bench.” And while the characters and cases that “More Perfect” touches on won’t be unfamiliar to legal professionals, some of the backstory might be....

When it comes to starting a small business, figuring out which state you should incorporate in is something that often comes up. Even if you aren’t worried about which state to choose, chances are good that at least one business person you know will ask which state you’re filing your incorporation documents in. There are a lot of choose from, but most business owners just pick from three. Aside from your home state, Nevada and Delaware are the most popular states in which to incorporate a new business....

If you’re like most lawyers, you’ve waited until the last minute to ensure you have all your credits for Minimum Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) or Continuing Legal Education (CLE). Or maybe you’re the type to plan out a few credits a month (no need to brag), but you want to avoid the price tag that comes with many CLEs. Whether you’re looking for the latest developments in family law and estate planning or something a little more niche, keeping up on credits is an integral part of being in the legal profession....

Earlier this week, the long-simmering and now-public feud between Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Seamus McCaffery and Chief Justice Ronald Castille finally ended with McCaffery’s resignation. Their bitter battle goes back years (and ended with a pornographic email scandal); many suspect it was the reason why Castille ran a retention election knowing that he’d only be able to serve a single year because of the state’s age limit. Castille himself admitted that he was gunning for McCaffery, calling him a “sociopath” in the court’s suspension order earlier this month....

The Clean Air Act might be massive, complex, and unwieldy, but it doesn’t “occupy the field” of air pollution control, the Sixth Circuit reminded us in two decisions released earlier this month. As such, the Clean Air Act does not preempt state common law claims against polluters who are regulated under the Act. Even if you’re in compliance with federal rules and regulations, you can still be sued for pollution under state common law, the court found....

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Senegalese couple’s asylum appeal this week, finding that the couple failed to assert a well-founded fear that their daughters would be subject to female genital mutilation if they returned. Aminata Dieng and her husband Ousseynou N’Diaye Lo asked for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA’s) final order of removal denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT)....

The 3rd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling last week, sending the case back to U.S. District Judge Jan E. DuBois. The decision involved the disclosure of emails and other confidential communications by the law firm of Kohn, Swift & Graf P.C. in a pollution lawsuit against Chevron, reports The Philadelphia Inquirer. This isn’t your typical motion to compel discovery, however. The case made it to appeals, largely on the issue of fraud....

“Really the Social Security Administration and the Justice Department should have been able to do better than they did in this case.” Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner, never one to shy away from a benchslap, ended a disability appeal opinion this week with an admonishment that an administrative law judge (ALJ) must discuss the meaning of “past relevant work” before deciding that a disability benefits applicant was capable of doing “past relevant work....

In US v. Burkett, No. 09-30260, the court of appeals affirmed defendant’s conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(g), holding that, contrary to defendant’s argument that the seizure of the firearm from his coat pocket stemmed from a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, the record developed during the suppression hearing amply supported a conclusion that the “stop and frisk” in this case was reasonable....

In a robbery prosecution, grant of petitioner’s habeas petition is reversed where the district court erred in failing to accord the deference required by 28 U.S.C. section 2254(d) to the state court’s evaluation of the pretrial identification procedures used by the police. Read Dunlap v. Burge, No. 07-0592 Appellate Information Submitted: February 5, 2009 Decided: September 28, 2009 Judges Opinion by Judge Stanceu Counsel For Appellant: Sally Wasserman, New York, NY...