Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed Wilfredo Moreno Ferrer's appeal as moot because he completed his term of imprisonment. The court held that without a live sentence to reduce, there is no continuing injury to support Article III jurisdiction.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court order enforcing a settlement agreement and denying a motion for sanctions. The appellate court found no reversible error in the lower court's decision.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' summary dismissal of an asylum appeal because the petitioner failed to file a required brief and provided an insufficient notice of appeal. The court further declined to review the merits of the asylum claims due to non-exhaustion of administrative remedies.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a 180-month sentence for attempted coercion of a minor, ruling that the district court did not commit plain error by failing to expressly recite the Sentencing Guideline range. The court held that judges retain discretion to weigh statutory factors and are not required to explicitly discuss each factor or the specific guideline calculation on the record.
The Fourth Circuit reversed a district court's denial of a motion to suppress, holding that a Forest Service officer unreasonably extended a traffic stop to investigate unrelated criminal activity. The court found the officer abandoned the stop's original mission immediately, violating the Fourth Amendment under the standard set in Rodriguez v. United States.
The Ninth Circuit denied Ciro Flores-Flores' petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision refusing to reconsider a denial of cancellation of removal. The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion because Flores voluntarily left the U.S. in 1999, breaking the ten-year continuous physical presence required for relief regardless of the validity of his notice to appear.
The Eleventh Circuit vacated Jason Edward Lopez's sentence because the district court miscalculated his advisory guideline range by applying only a one-level acceptance-of-responsibility reduction when he was entitled to two. The court held that this miscalculation was reversible error rather than harmless because the district court failed to clearly state it would have imposed the same sentence regardless of the error.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in a products liability case, holding that the district court correctly applied the strict good cause standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) to deny a late motion to amend a scheduling order. Because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the requisite diligence in securing expert testimony, his claims were properly dismissed as fatal to his case.
The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order rejecting a motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. The court affirmed that the petitioner failed to satisfy the procedural requirements of Matter of Lozada because he did not provide his former counsel sufficient time to respond to allegations before filing his motion.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit dismissed this appeal sua sponte for lack of jurisdiction. The court found that the district court's order was not final because it did not dispose of all claims in the case.
