Minnesota Lawyer
Civil Practice
Pro Se Plaintiff
Failure To State Claim
Where a South Dakota resident appealed the district court’s dismissal of her pro se complaint for failure to state a claim, there was no basis for reversal.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-2549 Engel v. Engel, per curiam. Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota.
Civil Rights
Inmate Action
Exercise Time; Qualified Immunity
Where an inmate challenged the dismissal of his complaint against prison officials for failing to provide enough exercise time, qualified immunity applied, and the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
Title IX
Elimination of University Sports Team; Preliminary Injunction
Plaintiff appealed the denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff had filed suit to challenge defendant’s decision to eliminate its men’s gymnastics team to bring its athletics program into compliance with Title IX and to reduce the athletics program’s costs. Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction to reinstate the team pending the outcome of the case. The district court denied the motion, finding that plaintiff’s delay in filing his motion undermined his claim of irreparable harm.
Where plaintiff’s delay in seeking injunctive relief meant that it would have been impractical to reinstate the team and compete during the NCAA season, the district court properly exercised its discretion to deny plaintiff’s motion.
Judgment is affirmed.
Criminal Law
Conspiracy to Distribute
Motion to Suppress; Warrantless Parole Searches
Defendant appealed her conditional guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute, challenging the denial of her motion to suppress evidence and statements obtained by police during warrantless parole searches of her person and residence. As a condition of her parole for a prior state drug conviction, defendant agreed to submit to searches and seizures at any time, with or without a warrant, whenever reasonable suspicion was determined. Officers conducted searches after receiving allegations that defendant was involved in drug trafficking. On appeal, defendant argued that officers relied upon mere hunches to conduct the searches.
Where the totality of the circumstances, including defendant’s extensive criminal history, the corroborated informant testimony, defendant’s communications with individuals associated with drugs, and her nervous behavior when approached by police, could support officers’ reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify the warrantless parole searches, the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-1646 U.S. v. Schaefer, Kelly, J. Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota.
http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/23/04/221646P.pdf
Drug Offense
Offense Level Increase; Reasonableness of Sentence
Defendant appealed the sentence imposed by the district court after defendant’s guilty plea to a drug offense. Defendant challenged the district court’s imposition of a four-level increase for his role in the offense and argued that the sentence was unreasonable.
Where defendant admitted to being the head of a drug trafficking organization that involved five or more persons, the district court correctly imposed an increase for defendant’s role in the offense and imposed a reasonable sentence.
Judgment is affirmed.
Firearms Offenses
Competency Hearing; Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence
Defendant appealed the statutory minimum sentence imposed following his guilty plea to firearms offenses. Defendant challenged the substantive reasonableness of his sentence and argued that the district court failed to conduct a competency hearing.
Where the district court had discretion to decline to hold a competency hearing, it also imposed a reasonable sentence by choosing to impose the statutory minimum.
Judgment is affirmed.
Guilty Plea
Appeal Waiver
Where a defendant appealed after pleading guilty to drug and firearm offenses pursuant to a plea agreement that included an appeal waiver, to the extent that the challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was a challenge to the voluntariness of the guilty plea, the claim was not cognizable on direct appeal because the defendant did not move to withdraw the plea, and the appeal waiver was valid, applicable and enforceable, so the appeal is dismissed.
Appeal is dismissed.
22-2689 U.S. v. McCoy, per curiam. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri.
Kidnapping
Transporting a Minor; Evidentiary Rulings
Defendant appealed his conviction for kidnapping and transporting a minor across state lines for sexual purposes. Defendant challenged the exclusion of evidence of the victims’ prior sexual activity, the admission of prior misconduct and a prior sex offense conviction, and the rejection of his requested jury instruction and motion for a new trial.
Where evidence of the victims’ alleged past and subsequent prostitution was not material to the issues at trial and would merely subject the victims to embarrassment or undermine their credibility, the district court correctly excluded that evidence and admitted defendant’s prior bad acts as probative of his intent. The district court also properly rejected defendant’s proposed jury instructions where they were largely duplicative or failed to track the statutory elements.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-1581 U.S. v. Brandon, Shepherd. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa.
Making False Statement
Straw Purchases; Calculation of Base Level
Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following her guilty plea to making a false statement during the purchase of a firearm. Investigators determined that defendant and her then-boyfriend were engaged in straw purchases of firearms for prohibited persons. On appeal, defendant argued that the district court improperly calculated her Guidelines range, relied upon unproven facts when sentencing her, and erred by denying her a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
Where there was sufficient evidence to find that defendant knowingly transferred a semiautomatic firearm capable of a large-capacity magazine, the district court did not err in calculating defendant’s Guidelines range and properly denied an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction where defendant repeatedly minimized her involvement in the crime.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-2195 U.S. v. Rivero, per curiam. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa.
Possession with Intent to Distribute
Motion to Suppress; Miranda Waiver
Defendant appealed his conviction for possession with intent to distribute. Defendant was arrested in his hotel room when staff called police. Officers gave defendant Miranda warnings, after which he admitted to having drugs in his room and possessing a vehicle determined to have been stolen. On appeal, defendant argued that his Miranda waiver was not voluntarily or intelligently made due to his intoxication.
Where the circumstances surrounding defendant’s arrest indicated that he was aware of his criminal liability and alertly responded to the officers’ questions, his intoxication was not so severe as to invalidate his waiver of his Miranda rights.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-1210 U.S. v. Harris, Benton, J. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri.
Possession with Intent to Distribute
Plea Agreement; Appeal Waiver
Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute. Defendant pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that contained an appeal waiver.
Where the issues raised by defendant fell within the scope of the appeal waiver in his plea agreement, the court dismissed the appeal.
Appeal is dismissed.
Revocation of Supervised Release
Unproven Violations; Sentencing Factors
Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. The probation office petitioned to revoke supervision based on five violations of the conditions of defendant’s supervised release. Defendant admitted to one violation, although the judgment indicated that defendant was adjudicated guilty of all five. On appeal, defendant argued that the district court improperly relied upon unproven violations and the need “to provide just punishment” in crafting defendant’s sentence.
Where the district court acknowledged that defendant had admitted to only one violation and found that defendant had ongoing difficulties in complying with the conditions of supervised release, it did not abuse its sentencing discretion.
Judgment is affirmed.
Sentencing
Appeal Waiver
Where a defendant challenged his sentence in a murder-for-hire case, the plea agreement included an appeal waiver that was valid, enforceable and applicable to the issues, so the appeal is dismissed.
Appeal is dismissed.
22-3259 U.S. v. Hill, per curiam. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri.
Supervised Release
Revocation; Special Condition
Where a defendant challenged the revocation of his supervised release and the imposition of a special condition, the district court did not err in revoking the supervised release based on the defendant’s failure to allow a visit by his probation officer or to answer the officer’s questions truthfully when he invoked the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a call to the officer, and the court also did not plainly err by imposing a new special condition prohibiting the defendant from accessing devices connected to the internet without the prior written approval of the probation officer.
Judgment is affirmed.
22-2493 U.S. v. Sullivan, per curiam. Appealed from U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa.
Employer-Employee
Discrimination
Denial of Summary Judgment; Adverse Summary Judgment
Plaintiff appealed the denial of her motion for summary judgment in her employment discrimination action and the grant of summary judgment in favor of her former employer.
Where there was sufficient evidence in the record to support granting defendant summary judgment, the court affirmed.
Judgment is affirmed.
Immigration
Asylum
Removal
Where petitioner sought review of the denial of his applications for asylum and the withholding of removal, the court lacked jurisdiction to review because the petitioner did not meaningfully raise a constitutional or legal challenge to the agency’s finding that the application was untimely and that he failed to show the deadline should be excused based on extraordinary circumstances, and petitioner waived his claim for the withholding of removal, so the petition for review is denied.
Petition denied.
Landlord – Tenant
Fair Housing Amendments Act
Reasonable Accommodations; Government Voucher
Where the owner of a mobile home park challenged a district court ruling that found its refusal to accept a tenant’s government housing voucher violated the Fair Housing Accommodations Act, the grant of injunctive relief is vacated because the statutory requirement that a landlord make reasonable accommodations does not extend to alleviating the tenant’s lack of money to pay rent.
Vacated.
