James Taylor

Correspondent

James Taylor

Capitol Hill correspondent, covers legislative and political stories.

Criminal Justice

Decisions covered by James Taylor

2,517 decisions
May 4 2026
10th Cir. 1:25-CV-01184-LTB-RTG Panel Decision

Rios v. Ensey, et al.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability to a state prisoner challenging the timeliness of his federal habeas petition. The court found the petitioner failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling that his claim was time-barred.

May 1 2026
4th Cir. 26-6116 Per Curiam

Deanna Sharp v. South Carolina Department of Social Services

The Fourth Circuit dismissed Deanna Sharp's appeal from a district court order denying her habeas petition because she filed her notice of appeal past the mandatory thirty-day deadline. The court held that strict adherence to the filing period is a jurisdictional requirement, leaving the appellate court without authority to hear the case.

May 1 2026
4th Cir. 25-6939 Per Curiam

Kevin Mark Willson v. Director South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from a district court order denying a habeas corpus petition. The court held that the petitioner forfeited his right to appellate review by failing to file specific objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation.

May 1 2026
4th Cir. 25-6932 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JAMAR GREEN

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court order denying a defendant's motion for compassionate release. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in the lower court's determination that the defendant failed to establish extraordinary and compelling reasons for release.

May 1 2026
11th Cir. 1:18-cr-00260-LMM-CMS-1 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ANTHONY RONDEL BLAIR

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and twenty-year sentence of Anthony Blair, rejecting multiple challenges to the sufficiency of evidence and the legality of digital forensics. The court held that the government proved Blair's guilty knowledge through his recruitment scheme and financial gains, and that the warrantless passcode guess did not violate the Fourth Amendment.