Topic
Every decision we've filed under Criminal.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed the revocation of Preston Mills' supervised release but vacated his sentence as plainly unreasonable. The court held that the district court failed to address a non-frivolous mitigation argument regarding the extended time Mills spent under supervision.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court order authorizing the involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication to restore a defendant's competency to stand trial. Applying the strict four-factor standard from Sell v. United States, the court found the government met its burden by showing a compelling interest in prosecution and that medication was medically necessary and less intrusive alternatives were ineffective.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed an 87-month sentence for a convicted felon found in possession of a firearm, ruling that the district court properly applied sentencing guidelines and did not abuse its discretion. The court also remanded the case solely to correct a clerical error in the judgment document that incorrectly cited the Armed Career Criminal Act.
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 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 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 Eleventh Circuit summarily affirmed Eibe Scott's conviction for felon-in-possession, rejecting his Second Amendment challenges as foreclosed by binding precedent. The court held that its prior decision in United States v. Rozier remains controlling law despite recent Supreme Court rulings.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the denial of Matthew Sheehan's motion to suppress evidence, ruling that police possessed reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle based on corroborated informant tips and cell-site data. The court held that the totality of the circumstances supported the inference that Sheehan was engaged in an ongoing drug trafficking operation.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed Willie Junior Lilly's conviction and sentence, holding that his Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is foreclosed by binding circuit precedent. The court further rejected his sentencing argument, ruling that the district court correctly applied the Sentencing Guidelines to count his prior drug convictions.
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.