LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, ELDER LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW, REMEDIES
• Cao v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
• US v. Rodriguez

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE
• US v. Bucci

LATEST SUMMARIES

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, ELDER LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW, REMEDIES
Cao v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, No. 07-1394
In an action wherein plaintiff sought recovery under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 for alleged constitutional violations along with several state law causes of action after she was removed from her home, made to undergo a psychological evaluation, and placed in a state institution for the elderly, dismissal of plaintiff's complaint is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly dismissed plaintiff's section 1983 claim as untimely; and 2) with no federal cause of action remaining, the district court acted within its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claims. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE, SENTENCING
US v. Rodriguez, No. 06-2719
Conviction and sentence drug- and firearm-related offenses is vacated in part and remanded where: 1) with regards to a brandishing firearms conviction, the record was devoid of any indication that defendant or his co-conspirator displayed firearms for the purpose of intimidating other persons; 2) the government conceded that a life sentence imposed on defendant's conspiracy to use firearms in furtherance of drug conspiracy exceeded the statutory maximum sentence for that conviction; and 3) the district court plainly erred in imposing multiple consecutive sentences for two acts of firearm possession arising from the same predicate drug conspiracy. Read more...

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE
US v. Bucci, No. 06-2746, 07-1087
Conviction for drug- and firearm-related offenses, as well as, witness tampering and making false statements to the Drug Enforcement Administration, is affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) deficient trial counsel performance in violation of Sixth Amendment; 2) a denial of a motion to sever; 3) alleged structural error by the district court in closing the courtroom to the public on two occasions; 4) whether the district court permitted a constructive amendment of the indictment; 5) the sufficiency of the evidence; 6) erroneous jury instructions; 7) Sixth Amendment violation in the court's application of sentencing guidelines; and 8) a ruling allowing the government to redact portions of the recording and transcript of a conversation over a request for inclusion for impeachment purposes. Read more...