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

The Fifth Circuit vacated defendant's restitution order after he pleaded guilty to sexual exploitation of a child. The court held that, especially given the victim mother's inability to speak at sentencing, it was prudent to permit the district court to ask and decide whether special circumstances excused the government's failure to present evidence in the first instance regarding the amount of restitution. Accordingly, the court remanded to the district court for further proceedings. View "United States v. Villalobos" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed Defendant Petras and Shaker's conviction for interfering with the performance of the duties of a flight crew by intimidation, in violation of 49 U.S.C. 46504. The court held that defendants failed to meet their burden of proving that the prosecution engaged in purposeful discrimination, and the district court did not clearly err in determining that the prosecutor did not strike two jurors based on race. The court also held that there was no error in the jury instructions, and section 46504, as construed, was constitutional. The court rejected defendants' First Amendment as-applied, overbreadth, and vagueness challenges. Finally, the evidence was sufficient to convict Shaker, and Petras's argument that the district court violated the Sixth Amendment by ordering restitution based on its own findings was foreclosed by precedent. View "United States v. Petras" on Justia Law

Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud (Count 1), wire fraud (Counts 2-15), harboring and concealing a person from arrest (Count 16), and assisting a federal offender (Count 17). The Fifth Circuit held that the convictions as to Counts 16 and 17 must be vacated, holding that defendant's conspiracy-furthering acts did not qualify as harboring acts simply because they provided a third party with a revenue stream that funded his life on the lam. In this case, the government has not shown that any of defendant's acts continued the harboring offense. The court affirmed in all other respects and remanded to the district court. View "United States v. Lanier" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction for possession of firearms in furtherance of a crime of violence. The court held that the district court did not err by including the government's requested jury instruction. Although the court found that the addition unnecessarily confused the issue and should not have been included, it did not ultimately misstate the law and was therefore not reversible error. The court also held that there was sufficient evidence to convict defendant of possession of firearms in furtherance of the crime of extortion. View "United States v. Smith" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit vacated defendant's conviction for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime. The court held that the prosecutor's questioning of a detective admitted testimonial hearsay in violation of defendant's Confrontation Clause rights. Accordingly, the court remanded for a new trial. View "United States v. Kizzee" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence, holding that the Texas aggravated robbery statute, Texas Penal Code 29.03, qualifies as a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. 924(e). In this case, defendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and appealed the district court's decision to sentence him as a career offender. The court held that the statute was divisible and that the crime for which defendant was previously convicted at least three times was a violent felony under the ACCA. View "United States v. Lerma" on Justia Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography and to using interstate facilities to transmit information about minors. The Fifth Circuit dismissed defendant's appeal based on claims of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 errors based on his appeal waiver. The court held, however, that defendant's collateral attack waiver did not bar his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel because an ineffective assistance of counsel argument survives a waiver of appeal when the claimed assistance directly affected the validity of that waiver or the plea itself. In this case, the court need not determine whether counsel was obligated to warn defendant of a possible lifetime computer ban, or whether counsel was deficient in failing to do so, because defendant failed to demonstrate prejudice. The court dismissed defendant's appeal as to the Rule 11 errors and affirmed as to defendant's remaining claims. View "United States v. Crain" on Justia Law

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A) prohibits intentionally damaging a computer system when there was no permission to engage in that particular act of damage. The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction of knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causing damage without authorization, to a protected computer, in violation of section 1030(a)(5)(A). In this case, defendant was the Information Technology Operations Manager for ClickMotive, a software webpage hosting company. Upset that a coworker had been terminated, defendant sabotaged the company's electronic system by deleting files, disabling backup operations, diverting emails, and preventing remote access to the company's network. The court held that defendant lacked permission to inflict the damage he caused and sufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction. Finally, the court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague. View "United States v. Thomas" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of defendant's motion to suppress evidence that officers found in his pockets. The court held that the police did not establish an unconstitutional checkpoint by stopping a Greyhound bus where the police did not require the bus driver to stop at the station; the driver made the scheduled stop as required by his employer; the police only approached the driver after he had disembarked from the bus; the police did not order him to interact with them; after the police approached him, the driver could have declined to speak with the police; and the police in no way restrained the driver. The court also held that defendant lacked standing to challenge whether the bus driver voluntarily consented to the search. In this case, defendant voluntarily consented to answering the officers' questions and to the search of his luggage, and the officers did not perform an unconditional Terry pat down. View "United States v. Wise" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the State in this capital murder case. The court held that petitioner failed to present clear and convincing evidence sufficient to overcome the state trial court's determination that he was competent to waive counsel and plead guilty. The court rejected petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of appointed trial counsel and claims that he did not receive a fair trial and juror bias. Finally, the court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his request for an evidentiary hearing. View "Austin v. Davis" on Justia Law