Wednesday, April 25, 2007

A few unpublished 10th tidbits and a cert grant.

First, the 10th:

U.S. v. Davila-Salvatierra, 2007 WL 1153753 (4/19/07)(unpub'd) - 70-month reentry sentence was reasonable, even though the defendant indisputably reentered to be with his dying mother.

U.S. v. Gonzales, 2007 WL 1113958 (4/16/07)(unpub'd) - The district judge did not abuse his discretion when he denied the defendant's motions to suppress and to disclose CI as untimely, where they were filed one business day before trial---after the motion deadline.

U.S. v. McIntosh, 2007 WL 1098677 (4/13/07)(unpub'd) - 65-month sentence for aggravated assault was reasonable, even though the jury sent a letter during deliberations that said: "the collective heart of this jury cries out, even demands, we speak. We the jury do not wish to send Mr. McIntosh to jail. We feel that this would not serve justice. We believe there is great love in his family." The jury went on to suggest mandatory alcohol abuse and anger management school and told the defendant he could choose to lead with love or with hate.

Gaston v. Ploeger, 2007 WL 1087281 (4/12/07)(unpub'd) - Sheriff was entitled to qualified immunity for jail inmate suicide, even though he did not offer jailers basic corrections classes until they had been employed for a year and one officer had received no formal training at all after working 18 months.

Graham v. Attorney General of Kansas, 2007 WL 1128963 (4/17/07)(unpub'd) - The petitioner was not entitled to habeas relief where the state presented evidence that he asserted the identical defense in two prior drug possession trials that he presented in the instant case---that the clothes he was wearing in which the drugs were found were not his.

Cert grant:

U.S. v. Santos, 2007 WL 173657 (4/13/07) - A question with a circuit split: whether money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a), is violated when the defendant uses money to pay the expenses of the illegal enterprise, or must the defendant reinvest the net income from the illegal enterprise to violate § 1956(a).