FindLaw News

Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure

[08/20] US v. Hicks
In a prosecution for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of a firearm not registered to defendant, denial of a motion to suppress is vacated and case remanded where: 1) defendant did not object to a search of his home by police; 2) defendant was not removed from the home for the specific purpose of preventing him from objecting to a search; 3) defendant's girlfriend freely and voluntarily consented to the search; but 4) further factfinding was required to determine if officer's statement to girlfriend that he would get a warrant if consent was not given was based on a reasonable belief that he could, in fact, obtain a warrant.

[08/20] US v. Vinyard
Vacatur of defendant's guilty plea and sentence for manufacturing, possessing, and possessing with intent to distribute methamphetamine is vacated, and writ of mandamus issued ordering reinstatement of that sentence, where: 1) jeopardy had attached at sentencing, creating the possibility of a double-jeopardy challenge if the government subjected defendant to a new trial and therefore making the normal appeal process an inadequate remedy; 2) release of defendant pending re-trial, and the possibility of acquittal at a second trial, constituted irreparable harm; 3) the district court erred in applying Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a) to correct its own alleged errors in sentencing defendant; and 4) the district court violated Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(e) by setting aside defendant's guilty plea.

[08/20] US v. Reed
Convictions for being a felon and a drug user in possession of a firearm are affirmed over claims that: 1) consent to search defendant's residence given by a co-tenant was invalid; and 2) a proposed jury instruction was improperly denied.

[08/20] US v. Cannon
Conviction and sentence for distributing crack cocaine are affirmed over objections that: 1) there was insufficient evidence to convict given the failure of recording equipment that was to audiotape the drug transaction; 2) deposition testimony of an unavailable witness used against defendant was prejudicial and violated defendant's Sixth Amendment rights; and 3) the judge used a preponderance of the evidence standard to find drug quantities that subjected defendant to a mandatory minimum sentence.

[08/20] US v. Branch
Conviction and sentence for drug- and firearm-related offenses is affirmed where: 1) there was no question that the police were allowed to detain defendant after witnessing him commit a traffic violation; and 2) during this detention the police formed a "reasonable suspicion" of ongoing criminal activity that justified extension of the traffic stop; and 3) defendant's other claims were without merit.

More...

White Collar Crime

[08/19] US v. Farr
A conviction for tax fraud is reversed where during trial the government constructively amended the indictment against her, trying her not just for the crime described in the indictment (failure to pay quarterly employment taxes for a medical clinic) but also for a separate and additional offense (failure to pay a trust fund recovery penalty assessed against her personally). The circuit court does, however, reject a claim that there was insufficient evidence in the record to sustain her conviction, and that consequently she could not be subjected to retrial under a lawful indictment.

[08/19] US v. Carter
Sentence for tax fraud, money laundering, and engaging in illicit monetary transactions is affirmed over the government's objections as to: 1) findings based on defendant's age that she was unlikely to commit future crimes; 2) a finding that defendant's offenses were not typical money-laundering offenses; and 3) several other mitigating circumstances found pursuant to consideration of the 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a) factors.

[08/18] US v. Simpson
A sentence and order of restitution imposed for defendant's crime of mail fraud, involving his underreporting of payroll information for his businesses to his workers' compensation insurance carriers, is affirmed where the district court correctly concluded that the "loss" caused by this conduct was the amount of additional premiums that the insurance carriers would have charged had they been given accurate information.

[08/14] US v. Reasor
Sentence for mail fraud, bank fraud, and making a false statement on a credit application is affirmed where: 1) defendant did not offer evidence to rebut challenged amounts in the loss calculation; and 2) an upward adjustment of defendant's offense level for misrepresenting herself as acting on behalf of a religious organization was properly applied.

[08/13] US v. Peterson
In a prosecution of defendants, who subsidized down payments to home buyers and then submitted misleading gift letters to HUD falsely stating that a family member or friend of the buyer had provided the money for the down payment, their resulting convictions are affirmed where: 1) although it would be preferable for district courts to use a definition of materiality tracking the language approved by the Supreme Court in US v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506 (1995), in this case, the district court did not commit plain error by giving the jury instruction it did; 2) the false gift letters and the source of the down payment for HUD-insured loans were material to HUD; and 3) defendants' actions were the actual and proximate cause of HUD's losses, and a restitution order for the full amount of its loss was proper.

More...