Mar 27 2026
5th Cir. 25-40345 Per Curiam

United States v. Selon

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a motion by appointed counsel to withdraw from representing the defendant. The court dismissed the appeal after finding that the assigned attorney properly followed Anders procedure and identified no nonfrivolous issues for review.

Mar 27 2026
11th Cir. 8:22-cr-00441-CEH-LSG-1 Per Curiam

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KIMBERLY KIEHL

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed Kimberly Kiehl's conviction and sentence, ruling that her prior failure to object to the magistrate judge's report waived her challenge to the voluntariness of her guilty plea. The court further held that the sentence appeal waiver was enforceable because the magistrate judge explicitly explained its scope during the plea colloquy.

Mar 27 2026
5th Cir. 25-50231 Per Curiam

United States of America v. Luciano Diaz-Contreras

The Fifth Circuit affirmed a federal sentence, holding that a prior four-year state firearms conviction counts toward criminal history points even if the defendant did not physically serve the full term. The court also rejected a challenge to a supervised release revocation, finding the district court properly considered the defendant's history and the need for public protection.

Mar 26 2026
11th Cir. 2:23-cr-00041-TPB-KCD-1 Per Curiam

United States v. Colon-Ocasio

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a statutory maximum sentence of 840 months for child pornography offenses, ruling that the district court did not abuse its discretion. The court held that the district court properly weighed the need to protect the public over the defendant's mitigating arguments regarding his mental health.

Mar 26 2026
11th Cir. 6:24-cr-00211-PGB-NWH-1 Per Curiam

United States v. Nickens

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a 36-month prison sentence for wire fraud, rejecting the defendant's claim that the district court abused its discretion by imposing an upward variance based on his extensive criminal history. The court held that the sentencing judge properly weighed the defendant's history of fraud and uncharged conduct alongside the seriousness of the offense and the need for public protection.