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

The Fifth Circuit withdrew its prior opinion as to Defendant Adam Main and substituted the following opinion in its place. The only changes to the prior opinion are in sections V(B), VII(A), and the conclusion.The court held that the district court was permitted to give the deliberate ignorance instruction as to Main. The court exercised its discretion to vacate the forfeiture order entered against Main and remanded for the determination of an award based on the property that Main obtained as a result of the fraud. Therefore, the court vacated the forfeiture order entered against Main and remanded for further proceedings in light of Honeycutt v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1626 (2017). As to all defendants, the court modified the restitution and forfeiture orders to eliminate the offset. View "United States v. Sanjar" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for possessing, while in federal prison for a child-pornography offense, obscene depictions of a minor engaged in sexually-explicit conduct (images). The court held that defendant, through his nolo contendere plea and statements in district court, knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his argument that the images were not obscene. The court also held that defendant's ten-year sentence was not grossly disproportionate to his crime and the court declined to impose a categorical rule that a ten-year sentence for a recidivist's possessing obscene material depicting sexual acts of children was categorically disproportionate. View "United States v. Farrar" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed Defendant Hernandez and Mendoza's sentences after they pleaded guilty to wire and bank fraud charges arising out of their modified Ponzi scheme. Defendants, two former credit union employees, issued unrecorded share certificates and misappropriated the proceeds. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying a two-level sentencing increase to Hernandez's sentence under USSG 2B1.1(b)(11) for possession or use of an authentication feature to further the crime; the district court did not err by holding Hernandez responsible for a loss of $18,376,542, which led to a 20-level increase in her base offense level under USSG 2B1.1(b)(1); and the district court carefully considered Mendoza's request for a downward departure, mitigating factors, the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors, and reasonably concluded that her sentence was warranted. View "United States v. Hernandez" on Justia Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking of children by force, fraud, or coercion. As part of his plea agreement, he agreed to pay restitution to the victims. After defendant's trial counsel was dismissed, but before his appellate counsel was appointed, the probation officer submitted a Fourth Addendum to defendant's presentence report (PSR) recommending a more onerous restitution award based on a new method of calculation. The Fifth Circuit held that the acceptance of an addendum to a PSR recommending a more onerous restitution award constitutes a critical stage. In this case, defendant was unconstitutionally deprived of the effective assistance of counsel during a critical stage of trial proceedings. Accordingly, the court vacated and remanded for further proceedings. View "United States v. Guerra Pleitez" on Justia Law

When defendants were originally sentenced, each received a sentence reduction for previously serving time on related state charges. The government then requested that the district court "correct" defendants' sentences pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a) to eliminate the reductions. The Fifth Circuit held that defendants' initial sentences were not "clear error" correctable under Rule 35(a). Accordingly, the court vacated the order correcting defendants' sentences and reinstated the original judgments for each defendant. View "United States v. Hankton" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. The court held that, although the alternate juror's presence during deliberations violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 24(c), the temporary presence of the alternate did not impact the jury's verdict and the curative instruction sufficiently dispelled any risk of prejudice. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motions for mistrial and a new trial. View "United States v. Kelly" on Justia Law

An officer who has provided information for the purpose of its being included in a warrant application under Hart v. O'Brien, 127 F.3d 424 (5th Cir. 1997), has assisted in preparing the warrant application for purposes of Jennings v. Patton, 644 F.3d 297 (5th Cir. 2011), and Hampton v. Oktibbeha County Sheriff Department, 480 F.3d 358 (5th Cir. 2007), and may be liable, but an officer who has not provided information for the purpose of its being included in a warrant application may be liable only if he signed or presented the application. Plaintiff filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against defendant after plaintiff was arrested for an assault committed by another man with the same first and last names. The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of summary judgment in favor of defendant and held that defendant was entitled to summary judgment even when construing all the facts in the light most favorable to plaintiff. The court reasoned that the connection between defendant's conduct and plaintiff's arrest was too attenuated to hold the deputy liable under the rule that the court reaffirmed or under any law that was clearly established at the time defendant filled out the incident report. View "Melton v. Phillips" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of petitioner's claim that the cell phone found in the victim's home, and the subsequently discovered call records linking him to the scene of the murder, were obtained from an unconstitutional search conducted pursuant to a deficient warrant. The court rejected petitioner's defaulted Fourth Amendment claim and held that the evidence fell within the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. View "Evans v. Davis" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendants' convictions for conspiracy to defraud Medicare, pay unlawful kickbacks, and launder money. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions; there was no merger of the money laundering promotion conspiracy with the health care fraud conspiracy because the two counts were distinct conspiracies, neither of which had as an element any overt act that could have overlapped to create a merger problem; the district court did not commit reversible error in the minor limitation of one cross-examination; the district court properly admitted a co-defendant's out-of-court confession over a Bruton objection; the district court did not err by giving a deliberate ignorance jury instruction; and there was no merit in one of the defendant's restitution objections. Finally, the cumulative error doctrine did not apply in this case. View "United States v. Gibson" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence of 30 months in prison after he pleaded guilty to possession with the intent to distribute more than 50 kilograms of marijuana. The court held that the district court properly applied the sentencing guidelines and considered the substance of Amendment 794; the district court properly concluded that defendant was not a minor participant; and the district court was free to analyze defendant's indispensable or essential role along with other considerations. View "United States v. Amieva-Rodriguez" on Justia Law