Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure

[07/22] US v. George
Conviction for bank robbery is affirmed where a denial of defendant's request to cross-examine a witness about her bipolar disorder did not violate the Confrontation Clause, absent a showing by defendant that such questioning would help demonstrate that the witness was incompetent or dishonest.

[07/22] US v. Woolsey
Convictions for drug and firearms offenses is affirmed, and sentence vacated with directions to impose a life term, where: 1) the good-faith exception applied, and evidence found in a police search was admissible, where defendant did not offer sufficient evidence to establish any intentional or reckless falsehood or omission in the affidavit underlying the search warrant; 2) a witness was properly excluded from testifying as defendant intended only to make the witness appear more culpable by inducing him to exercise his right against self-incrimination in front of the jury; 3) testimony of a second witness was properly excluded as irrelevant; and 4) defendant's prior federal conviction as a juvenile should have been considered during sentencing.

[07/22] US v. Waker
A conviction pursuant to a plea to possession by a felon of ammunition shipped in interstate commerce is affirmed over a challenge to a denial of a suppression motion where: 1) typographical errors did not render the warrant invalid; and 2) a reference in the warrant to a supporting affidavit was permissible.

[07/22] Williams v. Town of Greenburgh
In an action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims against defendant-town and two municipal officers is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's desire to use town's community center was not protected by his right to freedom of movement; 2) plaintiff's speech was not silenced or chilled by defendant's allegedly punitive conduct; and 3) probable cause supported the arrest and prosecution of plaintiff's criminal trespass.

[07/22] US v. De La Mata
In a case where the government obtained defendants' promises to convey certain interests in property to the United States, in lieu of a forfeiture trial and sentence, an order granting the government's motion for a "final order of forfeiture" is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) individual defendants and corporate defendants were properly before the court of appeals; 2) the circuit court rejects individual defendants' argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the government's motion sought relief in a criminal case via amended sentences; but 3) corporate defendants were not parties to individual defendants' agreements and thus retained certain property interests.

More...