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

Upon sua sponte panel rehearing, the Fifth Circuit withdrew its prior opinion and substituted the following opinion.The court vacated defendant's convictions for possessing and conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute methamphetamine, possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. The court held that defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause were violated when a law enforcement officer testified that he knew defendant had received a large amount of methamphetamine because of what the officer was told by a confidential informant. In this case, the error was not invited by the defense and was not harmless. The court also vacated the related revocation of defendant's supervised release and remanded for further proceedings. View "United States v. Jones" on Justia Law

Plaintiff, an inmate, filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 action against prison officials, alleging that they arranged for another inmate to attack him and stood by while the other inmate severely injured him. While the action was pending, plaintiff was released from prison. The district court granted summary judgment for defendants and dismissed plaintiff's claims.The Fifth Circuit vacated and held that fact issues remain as to whether the prescription period was suspended and, thus, as to whether plaintiff's claims were timely. Because the court additionally held that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies, the proper disposition was therefore dismissal without prejudice. Accordingly, the court remanded with instructions to dismiss the claims without prejudice to his ability to refile now that he was no longer bound by the exhaustion requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. View "Bargher v. White" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant a second evidentiary hearing, and did not err in denying her section 2255 motion because defendant waived the conflict of interest claim when she pleaded guilty despite purportedly knowing of the alleged conduct. View "United States v. Palacios" on Justia Law

On remand from the Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and held that his prior Texas robbery conviction was a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. 16(b). The panel, in light of Stokeling v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 544 (2019), and United States v. Reyes-Contreras, 910 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 2018) (en banc), issued a new opinion holding that Texas robbery requires the "use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force" and is therefore a crime of violence under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Therefore, defendant's conviction for Texas robbery was also a crime of violence under section 16(a) and an aggravated felony for purposes of 8 U.S.C. 1326(b)(2). View "United States v. Tzacir-Garcia" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit denied a petition for rehearing, withdrew its prior opinion, and substituted the following opinion.The court affirmed defendant's convictions for four counts of sex trafficking and one count of conspiracy. The court held that the seizure of the cellphone was "close enough to the line of validity" to permit the officer to prepare the second warrant that led to the search of the cellphone; the district court did not violate defendant's Confrontation Clause rights by prohibiting defendant from questioning one of the minor victims about a purported aggravated assault charge; even if the special findings made by the jury were supported by insufficient evidence, defendant's convictions would be unaffected; and the court refused to vacate his convictions based on a grand jury clause violation because there was substantial evidence against him. View "United States v. Fulton" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendants' convictions stemming from their involvement in a fraudulent scheme to collect disaster assistance. Defendant Walter was convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, eleven counts of wire fraud, two counts of theft from a program receiving federal funds, and three counts of money laundering; Defendant Rosie was convicted of the conspiracy count, ten counts of wire fraud, and a money laundering count; and Defendant Anita was convicted of the conspiracy count.The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict defendants. The court also held that the district court did not misapply a two-level sentencing enhancement under USSG 2B1.1(b)(9)(A) to Rosie's sentence where the offense involved a misrepresentation that the defendant was acting on behalf of a charitable, educational, religious, or political organization, or a government agency. The court vacated the no-new-credit special condition and remanded for the district court to reform the written no-new-credit condition to match the one implied by the oral sentence of restitution. The court also vacated the no-gambling special condition, because it was not so clearly consistent with an oral pronouncement of restitution as to be reasonably encompassed within that pronouncement. The court affirmed the remaining two challenged conditions. View "United States v. Diggles" on Justia Law

USSG USSG 2K2.1(b)(4) requires only that one serial number be altered or obliterated on a firearm, even if others are clearly legible. The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence after he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. The court held that the district court did not err by applying a four-level sentencing enhancement under USSG 2K2.1(b)(4), for an altered or obliterated serial number on the firearm. In this case, the metal serial-number plate had been removed from the frame of the handgun, but it had a legible serial number on its side. Therefore, the metal serial number plate altered or obliterated the serial number. View "United States v. Jones" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit held that the special condition of supervised release imposed by the district court for defendant to participate in a mental health treatment program was not supported by the record. In this case, the district court's reasoning was scant and the court's independent review of the record determined that the district court could have imposed a less restrictive alternative. Therefore, the district court committed reversible plain error and the court modified the sentence by striking the condition. The court otherwise affirmed the sentence as modified. View "United States v. Bree" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's acceptance of defendant's guilty plea to possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon. The court first considered the entire record in assessing the sufficiency of the factual basis. In this case, assuming arguendo that the factual basis contained a viable justification defense, the record plainly established that defendant knowingly possessed a firearm. Therefore, the court held that the factual basis demonstrated that defendant's conduct satisfied all elements of the offense. View "United States v. Ortiz" on Justia Law

The Fifth Circuit affirmed defendant's sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to illegal reentry into the United States after being previously removed. The court held that defendant failed to prove error affecting his substantial rights where nothing about the classification of his prior sex offenses altered the district court's focus on his contumacy. The district court determined that defendant's earlier conviction failed to deter defendant, because he quickly reentered the United States after his most recent illegal reentry conviction. In this case, the district court never cited the sexual assault convictions in explaining its chosen sentence. Rather, the district court's explanation made clear that the judge based the sentence on factors independent of the Guidelines. View "United States v. Sanchez-Hernandez" on Justia Law