8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Digest: May 6, 2026

Listen to this article

Bankruptcy

Chapter 13

Dismissal; Suggestion of Death

Debtor appealed the order of the bankruptcy court that denied his motion to vacate the dismissal of his Chapter 13 action. During the pendency of the appeal, a creditor filed a suggestion of death accompanied by an obituary for debtor.

Where no party had come forth within a reasonable time to prosecute debtor’s appeal, the court dismissed the appeal without prejudice for a personal representative to reinstate the appeal.

Appeal is dismissed.

In re: Wagner (MLW No. 84688/Case No. 25-6017 – 3 pages) (U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Minnesota, Constantine, J.

Civil Rights

Sex Offender Registration Program

§1983; Failure to State a Claim

Plaintiffs, a group of civilly committed sex offenders in Minnesota’s sex offender program, appealed the dismissal of their §1983 action for failure to state a claim.

Where the record supported the district court’s reasoning in dismissing plaintiffs’ action, the court affirmed.

Judgment is affirmed.

Pyron v. Johnston (MLW No. 84699/Case No. 25-2709 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Bryan, J.

Contracts

Partnership Agreement

Venture Capital Fund; Motion to Compel Arbitration

Defendants appealed the denial of their motion to compel arbitration. Defendants planned to establish a venture capital fund and capitalize it with shares of plaintiffs’ company. Plaintiffs would receive common stock under an equity bonus plan and convey some of it to defendants. Plaintiffs signed option agreements that gave defendants the option to acquire a third of plaintiffs’ shares. The parties later amended the agreements, but plaintiffs claimed they were misled as to the nature of the amendments. The parties also created a partnership agreement to establish the venture capital fund, which contained an arbitration clause.

Where plaintiffs had not signed the partnership agreement in their individual capacities but rather through entities controlled by them, the district court correctly determined that there was no valid arbitration agreement between the parties, especially as plaintiffs had not received a benefit from the partnership.

Judgment is affirmed.

Schlacks v. Chheda (MLW No. 84687/Case No. 25-1533 – 11 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Gruender, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Wimes, J.

Settlement

Motor Vehicle Accident Claim; Contract Formation

Plaintiff appealed the district court’s grant of defendant’s motion to dismiss. Defendant was injured in a motor vehicle collision with a driver insured by plaintiff. Plaintiff believed the parties had reached a settlement agreement and filed suit for breach of contract when defendant denied the existence of a settlement.

Where the settlement agreement that plaintiff tendered to defendant was not a mirror image of the terms of defendant’s initial settlement offer, the district court correctly determined that the parties had not formed an agreement.

Judgment is affirmed.

Permanent General Assurance Corporation v. Spooner (MLW No. 84711/Case No. 25-2552 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Arnold, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Phillips, J.

Criminal Law

Aiding and Abetting Tax Fraud

Appeal Waiver; Sentencing Challenges

Defendant appealed the sentence and restitution order imposed following her guilty plea to aiding and assisting the preparation of a false tax return, pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver.

Where the appeal waiver was valid and enforceable, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction and sentence where there was no competent evidence of government misconduct.

Judgment is affirmed; appeal is dismissed.

U.S. v. Smith (MLW No. 84715/Case No. 25-3293 – 3 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Marshall, J.

Drug Offense

Motion to Suppress; Calculation of Guidelines Range

Defendant appealed his conviction, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress, the district court’s calculation of the Guidelines range and various other aspects of the pre-trial proceedings and the trial.

Where there were adequate facts to support the denial of the suppression motion and sufficient evidence to impose a sentencing enhancement for making false statements, the court upheld defendant’s conviction and sentence.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Nabors (MLW No. 84710/Case No. 25-2108 – 3 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Limbaugh, J.

Drug Offense

Offense Level Enhancement; Safety Valve Relief

Defendant appealed the mandatory minimum sentence imposed following his guilty plea to a drug offense and the imposition of an aggravating-role offense level enhancement, arguing that he qualified for safety valve relief.

Where the record showed that defendant bore the financial risks of drug distribution, the district court correctly applied an offense level enhancement.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Maheia (MLW No. 84706/Case No. 25-1108 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa, Rose, J.

Drug Offense

Possession of Firearm in Furtherance of Drug Offense; Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence

Defendant challenged the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed following his conviction for drug offense and possession of a firearm in furtherance of that offense.

Where the district court had already varied downward in sentencing defendant, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to vary downward further based on the record.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Thor (MLW No. 84700/Case No. 25-3314 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Brooks, J.

Drug Offense

Sufficiency of Evidence; Distribution

Defendant appealed his conviction for drug offenses, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for distribution resulting in serious bodily injury. Defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to show that he allowed the victim to use some of his personal quantity of drugs constituted distribution.

Where the evidence showed that defendant had invited the victim to his apartment, consumed some of his fentanyl, and then left some for the victim to also consume, defendant had “given” the drugs to the victim.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Harris (MLW No. 84685/Case No. 24-3497 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, Gerrard, J.

Felon in Possession of Firearm

Constitutionality of Statute; Sentencing Enhancement

Defendant appealed his conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, challenging the constitutionality of the statute of conviction and arguing that the district court erred in imposing an offense level enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony.

Where defendant’s constitutional argument was foreclosed by circuit precedent, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction, and the government presented sufficient evidence that defendant possessed a firearm in connection with a theft.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Gaines (MLW No. 87401/Case No. 24-3400 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa, Locher, J.

Felon in Possession of Firearm

Motion to Suppress; Reasonable Suspicion

Defendant appealed his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress. Defendant was arrested after police on patrol heard a bottle hit the ground and then observed the bottle near a vehicle with the passenger window rolled down. When the officers approached the vehicle, defendant stepped out, and the officers observed a bulge in his waistband. Defendant refused to submit to a pat-down and instead fled the scene.

Where the totality of the circumstances supported the officers having reasonable suspicion that defendant had violated state littering laws, they had a sufficient basis to detain defendant.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Gatnoor (MLW No. 84709/Case No. 25-2052 – 3 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Lange, J.

Firearm Offense

Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence; Upward Variance

Defendant challenged the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to a firearm offense.

Where the district court adequately considered the relevant statutory sentencing factors, there was no abuse of sentencing discretion in imposing an upward variance or considering factors already accounted for in the Guidelines range.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Britton (MLW No. 84702/Case No. 24-3555 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Rudofsky, J.

Habeas Petition

Deference to State Court Rulings; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Petitioner appealed the district court’s denial of his habeas petition. Petitioner and others beat and murdered a victim, which resulted in petitioner’s conviction for capital murder and a death sentence. On appeal, petitioner challenged the constitutionality of the statutory requirement to give deference to state court decisions and argued that the district court erred in its assessment of petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims.

Where Supreme Court precedent had not ruled the deference requirement unconstitutional, the court found no error in the district court’s assessment of the state court’s application of its res judicata doctrine, and plaintiff’s lack of evidence supporting his ineffective assistance claims also justified the district court’s decision.

Judgment is affirmed.

Piper v. Attorney General for the State of South Dakota (MLW No. 87405/Case No. 25-2617 – 20 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Erickson, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Lange, J.

Resisting Arrest

Upward Variance; Abuse of Sentencing Discretion

Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following his conviction for impeding and resisting arrest by a federal officer, arguing that the district court abused its sentencing discretion in varying upward to impose an above-Guidelines sentence.

Where the district court considered defendant’s substantial criminal record, much of which was unscored in his criminal history score, there was no abuse of discretion in evaluating the statutory sentencing factors to impose an upward variance.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Janis (MLW No. 84704/Case No. 25-2264 – 4 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Kornmann, J.

Revocation of Supervised Release

Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence

Defendant challenged the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release.

Where the district court adequately considered the relevant statutory sentencing factors and imposed a within-Guidelines sentence, there was no abuse of sentencing discretion.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Brown (MLW No. 84714/Case No. 25-2958 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Miller, J.

Revocation of Supervised Release

Sufficiency of Evidence; Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence

Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release, arguing that the district court erred in finding that he had violated the terms of his supervised release and imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence.

Where the record included evidence of defendant’s failed drug tests and use of alcohol, the district court had sufficient evidence to find defendant had committed violations, and the district court considered the statutory sentencing factors when fashioning defendant’s revocation sentence.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Weigert (MLW No. 84698/Case No. 25-1645 – 4 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa, Williams, J.

Tax Offense

Upward Variance; Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence

Defendant appealed the substantive reasonableness of the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to a tax offense.

Where the district court made an individualized assessment of the circumstances, there was no abuse of discretion in imposing an upward variance.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Hutchings (MLW No. 84708/Case No. 25-2032 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Brooks, J.

Unlawful Possession of Firearm

Motion to Dismiss; Constitutionality of Statute

Defendant appealed his conviction for being an unlawful user of a controlled substance in possession of a firearm, asserting a facial challenge to the constitutionality of the statute of conviction.

Where defendant’s constitutional argument was foreclosed by circuit precedent, the court affirmed defendant’s conviction.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Mena (MLW No. 84686/Case No. 25-1143 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa, Locher, J.

Wire Fraud

Sentencing Enhancements; Substantive Reasonableness of Sentence

Defendant appealed the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy to commit wire fraud, arguing that the district court erred in imposing two enhancements to his sentencing range and imposed an unreasonable sentence.

Where defendant participated in a financial fraud scheme that involved the use of caller ID spoofing technology, investigations to target specific victims and details of actual law enforcement officials, the scheme was sufficiently sophisticated to trigger application of the sentencing enhancements.

Judgment is affirmed.

U.S. v. Weatherspoon (MLW No. 84707/Case No. 25-1556 – 6 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Arnold, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Southern District of Iowa, Rose, J.

Employer-Employee

Disability Insurance Benefits

Fraudulent Misrepresentation; At-Will Employee

Plaintiff appealed the dismissal of his complaint against his employer and disability insurance providers. Plaintiff claimed that his employer lied about when it fired him and that the insurers failed to pay all the benefits they owed him.

Where plaintiff was an at-will employee, he could not establish wrongful termination based solely on his employer’s internal rules and waited too long to assert disability discrimination claims, and the insurers reasonably determined that plaintiff no longer qualified as disabled.

Judgment is affirmed.

Michel v. Honeywell International (MLW No. 84703/Case No. 25-2665 – 3 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Ketchmark, J.

Immigration

Asylum

Withholding of Removal; Nexus

Petitioner sought review of the BIA’s order dismissing her appeal of an IJ’s denial of asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ concluded that petitioner had failed to demonstrate a nexus or show that her home government would be unable or unwilling to protect her. The BIA concluded that petitioner failed to meaningfully challenge the IJ’s determinations and thus waived her claims.

Where petitioner’s appeal only focused on other aspects of the IJ’s ruling, the BIA correctly determined that petitioner had failed to properly exhaust her challenge to the IJ’s determination.

Petition is denied.

Lopez-Lopez v. Blanche (MLW No. 84712/Case No. 25-2699 – 3 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Motion to Reopen

Administrative Closure; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Petitioner sought review of the denial of her motion to reopen and reissue a prior decision based on ineffective assistance of counsel and the denial of her motion to reopen and remand the case for administrative closure.

Where the BIA did not abuse its discretion in declining to apply equitable tolling to find petitioner’s motion timely, it was not obligated to consider the merits of petitioner’s ineffective assistance claim.

Petitions are denied.

Guinac v. Blanche (MLW No. 84684/Case No. 24-3345 & 25-1336 – 4 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Real Property

Breach of Contract

Damages; Motion for Continuance

Plaintiffs appealed the district court’s denial of a motion for continuance and entry of judgment on the jury’s verdict on damages in plaintiffs’ breach of real estate agreement action.

Where the motion was signed by only one plaintiff after plaintiffs’ counsel withdrew, there was no abuse of discretion in denying the motion where there was no indication as to when the reason for the continuance would be resolved.

Judgment is affirmed.

Garrett v. Stock (MLW No. 84713/Case No. 25-2878 & 25-2973 – 2 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Lange, J.