FindLaw News

Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure

[08/27] Mendez v. County of San Bernardino
In a suit against a city, county, sheriff's department and various individual defendants under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 arising from the aftermath of an officer-involved shooting that resulted in the death of plaintiff's deaf-mute son, various rulings against plaintiff before and after she prevailed in a jury trial are affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) there was no error as to jury instruction on plaintiff's emotional damages; 2) reduction of the punitive damages award was proper as it was excessive as a matter of due process; 3) summary judgment on a state law negligent training claim was proper; 4) an order denying plaintiff all fees and costs required vacatur and a remand for a determination of a reasonable award; 5) a sanctions order had to be vacated where the district court did not make a requisite bad faith finding; and 6) reassignment to a different judge was not warranted.

[08/27] US v. Allen
A conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and a felon in possession of ammunition is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court erred in permitting two witnesses to be improperly impeached; and 2) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.

[08/27] US v. Hogan
A conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute meth, possession with intent to distribute meth, and distribution of meth, is affirmed over claims that the district court erred in denying his motions to suppress and for acquittal, and in sentencing him to 188 months' imprisonment.

[08/27] US v. Espinosa
A sentence for drug- and firearm-related offenses is affirmed over defendant's claim that the district court erred when, for purposes of determining the advisory sentencing range, it grouped only conspiracy and manufacturing counts, but not firearms counts.

[08/27] US v. Wessels
In a case wherein defendant was convicted and sentenced for unauthorized use of a credit card, and later had her supervised release revoked and was sentenced again, the judgment is affirmed over a Fifth Amendment due process challenge.

[08/27] US v. Azure
Revocation of defendant's supervised release and imposition of a 24-month sentence are affirmed over claims that the judgment of the district court should be vacated and the case remanded because: 1) the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to conduct the revocation hearing; 2) the district court failed to undertake the requisite de novo review of the entire record; 3) defendant was not present at the time the district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and sentenced him; and 4) his sentence was unconstitutionally imposed to punish him for the offense underlying his revocation, rather than for his original offense.

[08/27] US v. Wright
A conviction and sentence for aggravated sexual abuse of a child is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) subject matter jurisdiction; 2) the sufficiency of the evidence on an attempted aggravated sexual assault conviction; 3) constructive amendment to the indictment; 4) Jencks Act violation; 5) erroneous admission of hearsay evidence; 6) erroneous admission of leading questions; and 7) sentencing issues.

[08/27] US v. Yelaun
Conviction and sentence for federal fraud related offenses committed during a scheme to collect insurance payments for medical tests is affirmed over claims of error that: 1) certain trial testimony was admitted in error; 2) there was a variance between the indictment's count 43, which charged defendant with conspiracy to commit money laundering, and the proof at trial; and 3) the judged erred in calculating defendant's sentence according to two sentence enhancements.

[08/27] US v. Sanchez-Badillo
Convictions and sentences for conspiring to distribute heroin, cocaine, cocaine base, and marijuana are affirmed over claims of error that: 1) jury's conspiracy verdict was not supported by evidence; 2) trial court made sentencing errors; 3) evidence was insufficient to support jury's verdict against one of the defendants on weapons charges and prosecutorial misconduct entitles him to a new trial; and 4) trial judge made impermissible comments in the jury's presence and defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel.

[08/27] US v. Venters
Conviction for possessing materials and equipment for manufacturing methamphetamine is affirmed where both exigent circumstances and probable cause to believe that defendant had committed child neglect justified police entry into defendant's home, and evidence seized as a result of that entry was not subject to suppression.

More...