Friday, March 11, 2016

Unpublished Decisions

U.S. v. Luster, 2015 WL 9463102 (12/28/15) (Kan.) (unpub'd) - Another ยง 3582(c)(2) motion fails due to Justice Sotomayor's concurrence in Freeman and the 10th's strict interpretation of it. It didn't matter if the judge's statements at the sentencing hearing and the judge's statement of reasons might indicate the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) sentence was based on a particular guideline range that had been lowered. All that matters is what the plea agreement said and it said nothing about a guideline range.

Tennyson v. Raemisch, 2015 WL 9487908 (12/30/15) (Col.) (unpub'd) - Another prisoner plaintiff's disturbing claims bite the dust. The 10th holds Mr. Tennyson cannot get relief for the prison depriving him of hygiene products. He did not note any injury that resulted from that deprivation. No relief also where a prison doctor stopped prescribing Zantac for Mr. Tennyson even after Mr. Tennyson told the doctor he would be "in pain all the time" without the medication. The 10th says Mr. Tennyson's warning did not put the doctor on notice that the resulting pain and discomfort from the lack of Zantac would rise to the level necessary for an Eighth Amendment violation. "Not every twinge of pain puts a medical professional under a constitutional obligation to act," the 10th assures us.

Jolliff v. Corrections Corporation of America, 2015 WL 9466839 (12/29/15) (okl.) (unpub'd) - The 10th holds that Mr. Jolliff did not sufficiently exhaust his administrative remedies, even though he never got a response to his initial grievance. Under the corrections department's policy, Mr. Jolliff was obligated to file another grievance complaining about the non-responsiveness. Since he did not do that, he's out of luck.