Correspondent
Capitol Hill correspondent, covers legislative and political stories.
The Eleventh Circuit granted the Government's motion to dismiss an appeal filed by a defendant who had signed a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver. The court held that the waiver was enforceable because it was made knowingly and voluntarily, barring the defendant from challenging the conviction or sentence.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Lawrence Alexander's conviction for making false statements to Medicare but vacated his restitution order due to insufficient evidence of actual loss. The court held that while the false statement was material to the enrollment process, the government failed to prove that Medicare specifically relied on the 2019 form to pay the claims at issue.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress self-incriminating statements made by a public employee during a criminal investigation. The court held that the defendant failed to prove he subjectively believed, or that such a belief was objectively reasonable, that he faced termination for refusing to speak to law enforcement.
The Fifth Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc, affirming that it remains bound by Supreme Court precedent allowing sentencing courts to consider conduct for which a defendant was acquitted. While the court expressed deep concern regarding the constitutional and fairness implications of this practice, it concluded that the specific facts of this case did not warrant a departure from binding authority.
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed Lorenzo Taylor Jr.'s appeal from a denial of compassionate release because the notice of appeal was filed after the strict 14-day deadline. Although the court initially treated the filing as a motion for an extension of time, the district court's subsequent denial of that motion rendered the appeal procedurally barred.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Chong Lee's habeas corpus petition, holding that while the State of Wisconsin likely violated his due process rights by failing to disclose and intentionally destroying evidence, the state court's chosen remedy was not an unreasonable application of federal law. The court emphasized that although the State's conduct undermined foundational justice principles, the petitioner failed to meet the high bar required under AEDPA to overturn the state court's decision.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the armed robbery convictions of Fredrick Eugene Carney and William John Ewing, rejecting challenges to the denial of severance, the admission of other-acts evidence, and the sufficiency of the evidence for a firearms conviction. The court also upheld the denial of Carney's motion to suppress, finding he lacked standing to challenge the seizure of his vehicle from a third party's residence.
The Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded a district court's dismissal of a habeas petition, clarifying that a final order of removal satisfies the 'in custody' requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2241 even when a noncitizen is physically confined by state authorities. The court held that the restraint on liberty imposed by a final deportation order is sufficient to confer federal habeas jurisdiction.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Adam Strege's complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The court also denied Strege's request to proceed in forma pauperis, characterizing his appeal as frivolous.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed Robert Carlos Cerrillo's conviction and sentence for unlawful firearm possession, rejecting his claim that the district court erred in applying an enhanced sentencing guideline based on attempted murder. The court further held that Cerrillo's facial constitutional challenge to the federal firearms statute was foreclosed by controlling precedent.
