James Taylor

Correspondent

James Taylor

Capitol Hill correspondent, covers legislative and political stories.

Criminal Justice

Decisions covered by James Taylor

2,423 decisions
Dec 23 2025
11th Cir. 1:21-cr-00052-JB-MU-1 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ERIKA KELLEY DAY

The Eleventh Circuit held that a district court lacks authority to depart below a statutory minimum sentence for one offense based solely on a government motion for substantial assistance regarding a separate offense. The court vacated the judgment and remanded for resentencing to ensure compliance with the specific statutory minimums attached to each count.

Dec 19 2025
1st Cir. 24-1475 Panel Decision

United States v. Robertson

The First Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentences of two Massachusetts State Police officers for a federal overtime fraud scheme but vacated a forfeiture order against one defendant. The court held that the government failed to prove which portion of the defendant's financial aid was directly traceable to his fraud rather than what he would have received legitimately.

Dec 19 2025
1st Cir. 24-1475, 24-1540, 24-1541 Panel Decision

United States v. Robertson and Griffin

The First Circuit affirmed the convictions of two Massachusetts State Police officers for wire fraud and theft of federal funds but vacated a forfeiture order against one defendant. The court held that the government failed to prove which portion of the financial aid received by the defendant was traceable to the fraud versus what he would have received legitimately.

Dec 19 2025
1st Cir. 24-1541 Panel Decision

United States v. Robertson

The First Circuit affirmed the convictions of two Massachusetts State Police officers for defrauding federal highway safety grants but vacated a forfeiture order against one defendant. The court held that the government failed to prove which portion of the financial aid received by the defendant was directly traceable to the fraud rather than what he would have received anyway.

Dec 17 2025
11th Cir. 4:20-cr-00045-RSB-CLR-2 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHARON ELIZABETH KEEGAN

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a conviction for child pornography production, ruling that a defendant's allegations of abuse made to a forensic psychologist were not admissible under the hearsay exception for medical diagnosis. The court held that because the statements were made primarily to prepare for litigation rather than to secure medical treatment, they lacked the necessary reliability to bypass cross-examination.

Dec 16 2025
1st Cir. 24-1867 Panel Decision

United States v. Abercrombie

The First Circuit affirmed a felon-in-possession conviction, ruling that circumstantial evidence of control and behavior was sufficient to prove constructive possession of a firearm found under a car seat. The court also held that the defendant waived his facial Second Amendment challenge by failing to adequately develop the argument on appeal.

Dec 16 2025
1st Cir. 24-1474 Panel Decision

United States v. Abercrombie

The First Circuit affirmed Tevin Abercrombie's conviction for unlawful firearm possession by a felon, ruling that circumstantial evidence of his control over the vehicle and suspicious behavior supported a finding of constructive possession. The court also held that Abercrombie waived his facial Second Amendment challenge to the statute by failing to adequately develop the argument on appeal.

Dec 16 2025
11th Cir. 5:22-cv-01448-LCB Published

National Small Business United d.b.a. National Small Business Association v. U.S. Department of the Treasury

The Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court, holding that the Corporate Transparency Act is a constitutional exercise of Congress's Commerce Clause power. The court further ruled that the Act's reporting requirements do not facially violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches.

Dec 12 2025
1st Cir. 21-1197 Panel Decision

JAMES GARREY v. SHEILA CREATON KELLY, Superintendent of MCI-Concord

The First Circuit affirmed the denial of James Garrey's habeas petition, ruling that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court did not unreasonably apply federal law in upholding a prosecutor's peremptory strike of a minority juror. The court held that the state trial court's acceptance of the prosecutor's race-neutral explanation was reasonable given the ambiguous record and the high deference required under AEDPA.