Every decision we've summarized — searchable, filterable, neutral.

Apr 16 2026
10th Cir. 4:21-CR-00351-GKF-3) Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JAMES WILLIAM BUZZARD

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a hearing on ineffective assistance of counsel because the rejected plea offer lacked a firm expiration date. The court dismissed the ineffective assistance claim without prejudice, directing the defendant to pursue such constitutional challenges through a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion rather than on direct appeal.

Apr 16 2026
11th Cir. 4:24-cr-00006-AW-MAF-1 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. QUANTAVIOUS HURT

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a 42-month prison sentence for a federal inmate who stabbed a fellow prisoner with a shank, rejecting claims that the sentence was unreasonably high. The court held that the district judge properly weighed the statutory factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the Guidelines' recommendation of ten to sixteen months against the defendant's violent conduct.

Apr 16 2026
10th Cir. 4:25-CV-00161-SEH-JFJ) Panel Decision

ERICK WANJIKU v. GENTNER F DRUMMOND

The Tenth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that jurists of reason would find the district court's ruling debatable. The court held that the petitioner lacked the required state custody to maintain a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

Apr 16 2026
11th Cir. 2:24-cv-14353-KMM Per Curiam

ROBERT WALKER v. BRETT MICHAEL WARONICKI

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Robert Walker's civil suit against judges, a law firm, and the Florida Bar for failure to state a claim. However, the court remanded the case to correct the procedural record, ordering that dismissals based on sovereign immunity be entered without prejudice to allow for potential refiling.

Apr 16 2026
9th Cir. 2:22-cv-00218-TOR Unpublished

Rose Nielsen v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's denial of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, clarifying that judicial disagreement alone does not prove the government's position was substantially justified. The panel held that the district court erred by treating the ALJ's decision and a dissenting opinion as dispositive evidence of reasonableness when the agency's error had already been established on remand.