Nov 25 2025
11th Cir. 1:20-cr-00063-DHB-BKE-1 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SHERLEY L. BEAUFILS

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Sherley Beaufils's convictions for submitting fraudulent Medicare claims for durable medical equipment she never properly prescribed. The court rejected challenges to the sufficiency of evidence, a missing jury instruction on deliberate ignorance, and a sentencing enhancement for perjury.

Nov 17 2025
11th Cir. 6:12-cv-00113-JRH-BWC Published

Jackson v. Catanzariti

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's decision to grant a voluntary dismissal of seven defendants in a civil rights excessive force case while imposing final judgment against them. The court also upheld the admission of evidence regarding the plaintiffs' criminal history and the chaotic nature of a prison riot, finding no abuse of discretion in the evidentiary rulings.

Nov 14 2025
1st Cir. 22-1735 Panel Decision

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CARLOS MALDONADO-VARGAS

The First Circuit affirmed Carlos Maldonado-Vargas's securities fraud conviction and sentence, rejecting claims that bank record summaries were inadmissible and that the evidence was insufficient to prove a Ponzi scheme. The court also upheld the restitution order, ruling that the district court could calculate losses and identify victims based on a broader scheme than those explicitly named in the indictment.

Nov 14 2025
11th Cir. 2:21-cr-00022-LGW-BWC-3 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. WILLIAM BRYAN

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the federal convictions of William Bryan, Gregory McMichael, and Travis McMichael for interference with rights and attempted kidnapping related to the death of Ahmaud Arbery. The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings regarding racial animus and the public nature of the streets, and established that automobiles are per se instrumentalities of interstate commerce.

Nov 12 2025
11th Cir. 2:23-cv-00733-SPC-KCD Published

Koletas v. United States of America

The Eleventh Circuit held that Transportation Security Officers qualify as investigative or law enforcement officers under the Federal Tort Claims Act, waiving sovereign immunity for intentional torts committed during airport security searches. This ruling reverses the district court's dismissal, allowing the plaintiff's claims of battery and false imprisonment to proceed against the United States.

Nov 10 2025
11th Cir. 3:21-cv-00329-MCR-ZCB Published

Watson v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of most tort and contract claims against Saudi Arabia but reversed the dismissal of claims alleging gross negligence in hiring and vetting a terrorist trainee. The court held that the Kingdom's affirmative acts in sending Mohammed Al-Shamrani to the United States were sufficient to overcome sovereign immunity under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.

Nov 6 2025
11th Cir. 8:22-cr-00208-VMC-AAS-1 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JEROME MILLER, JR

The Eleventh Circuit vacated a defendant's sentence because his prior Florida cocaine delivery convictions did not qualify as serious drug offenses under the Armed Career Criminal Act. The court held that the state law at the time of the offenses was broader than federal law due to the inclusion of ioflupane, creating a categorical mismatch.

Nov 5 2025
11th Cir. 1:21-cr-20052-DPG-1 Published

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ANTHONY BERNARD CARTER

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Anthony Carter's sex trafficking convictions, rejecting claims that a minor victim's statements to police were testimonial hearsay. The court also found that jury instruction errors regarding the indictment did not constitute plain error and that the evidence was sufficient to support the transportation charges.

Nov 4 2025
11th Cir. 4:23-cv-00208-AW-MAF Published

Shen v. Commissioner, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction regarding Florida's registration and affidavit requirements for real property owners. However, the court reversed the lower court's decision on the purchase restriction, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to challenge that specific provision.