Justia U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Defendant appealed his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. On appeal, defendant contended that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence and in applying a two-point sentencing enhancement for use of a minor to commit his crime. Because the officer's continued search and seizure beyond the scope of the initial traffic stop were justified by additional reasonable suspicion, the district court did not err in concluding that the scope of the stop was reasonable. Because the court found that the district court did not err in refusing to suppress the drug evidence, the court did not reach the remaining plain error factors. The court also concluded that the district court did not err in applying the U.S.S.G. 3B1.4 enhancement where defendant's choice to drive a truck containing over twenty kilograms of cocaine and a four-year-old girl from Laredo to Chicago constituted an "affirmative act" involving a minor in the offense. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment. View "United States v. Andres" on Justia Law

Defendant was found guilty of failing to comply with his registration requirement in violation of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), 42 U.S.C. 16913(a). On appeal, defendant argued that the district court's instruction to the jury erroneously defined the term "resides," and constituted harmful error. Because the district court's instruction was not inconsistent with SORNA and because defendant failed to allege the instruction misstated the Sentencing Guidelines, the court found no reversible error in the district court's instruction and affirmed the conviction. View "United States v. Wampler" on Justia Law

Albemarle challenged an arbitrator's award in a labor dispute after Albemarle terminated two employees for violating its safety protocols and the employees' union, USW, filed a grievance. Albemarle first contended that the arbitrator's finding of "cause for the Employer to issue discipline," left no choice under the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) but to affirm its decision to terminate the employees. Second, Albemarle maintained that the award was unenforceable as a violation of public policy. The court concluded that because the arbitrator's award neither violated the terms of the CBA nor public policy, the court must enforce it. Accordingly, the court reversed the award of summary judgment in favor of Albermarle and rendered judgment in favor of USW. View "Albemarle Corp. v. United Steel Workers, Local 103" on Justia Law