Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

Richard Bensinger produced and screened a film about Spacecon Specialty Contractors, LLC. Claiming the film conveyed several defamatory statements, Spacecon filed suit against Bensinger in federal district court based on diversity jurisdiction, and asserting a state-law claim for defamation per se. The district court granted Bensinger's motion for summary judgment, concluding the messages conveyed by the film involved matters of public concern and Spacecon did not show Bensinger published the film with actual malice. Finding no abuse of the district court's discretion, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "Spacecon Specialty Contractors v. Bensinger" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Christopher Lucero appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence. Defendant was sentenced before the effective date of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA). He asserted that the district court erred in failing to apply the FSA and its current statutory mandatory minimum sentencing scheme retroactively to reduce his sentence for possession of cocaine base. "At the heart of Lucero's argument lies the issue of whether the reduction of his sentence post FSA is a sentencing to which the FSA's reduced mandatory minimums apply. The Tenth Circuit was not persuaded by Defendant's arguments for retroactive application of the FSA, and affirmed his original sentence. View "United States v. Lucero" on Justia Law

A jury convicted Defendant Theodore "Cush" McDowell of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. Prior to trial, Defendant unsuccessfully sought to suppress evidence seized in the house where he was arrested. He appealed the denial of his motion to suppress as well as two sentencing issues. Finding no error in the district court's denial or sentence, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. McDowell" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant David Shuck was charged with five counts: conspiracy to manufacture 100 or more marijuana plants; the manufacture of 100 or more marijuana plants; two counts of the use and maintenance of a place for the purpose of manufacturing marijuana; and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Defendant entered a conditional guilty plea on all five counts and was sentenced in 2012 to eighteen months. Defendant argued to the Tenth Circuit that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress, and that the district erred in denying his motion for an additional downward departure in sentencing. Finding no error, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court. View "United States v. Shuck" on Justia Law

Defendant Abasi Baker was convicted on seven counts each of robbery affecting commerce, use of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant appealed his convictions, raising two arguments: (1) that use of a global-positioning-system (GPS) tracking device on his car violated his Fourth Amendment rights, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him on the eight firearms counts associated with the first four robberies. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit did not reach the merits of Defendant’s Fourth Amendment argument because he waived it by failing to raise it before trial. And the Court rejected Defendant’s argument that the evidence was insufficient for a rational jury to find that he possessed the identified firearm at the times charged. View "United States v. Baker" on Justia Law

Plaintiffs were high school students from Roswell, New Mexico who belonged to a religious group called "Relentless." They sued the Roswell Independent school district and its superintendent seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for allegedly violating their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights by preventing them from distributing 2500 rubber fetus dolls to other students. They also challenged the District's policies requiring preapproval before distributing any non-school-sponsored materials on school grounds. Teachers complained that students' preoccupation with the dolls disrupted classroom instruction: "[w]hile teachers were trying to instruct, students threw dolls and doll heads across classrooms, at one another, and into wastebaskets. Some teachers said the disruptions took eight to 10 minutes each class period, and others said their teaching plans were derailed entirely. An honors freshman English class canceled a scheduled test because students had become engaged in name calling and insults over the topic of abortion. A Roswell security officer described the day as 'a disaster' because of the dolls." A magistrate judge granted summary judgment for the District on all claims and Plaintiffs appealed. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and equal protection claims. The Court also affirmed dismissal of Plaintiffs' facial challenge to the District's preapproval policies. View "Taylor v. Roswell Independent School Dist. " on Justia Law

Prisoner-Petitioner Gary Abernathy appealed a district court judgment which dismissed his petition for the writ of habeas corpus. On appeal to the Tenth Circuit, petitioner argued that the district court miscalculated his sentence based on an allegedly faulty interpretation of United States Supreme Court precedent in "Chambers v. United States" (555 U.S. 122 (2009)). Finding no error with the district court's calculation, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that court's judgment and dismissed Petitioner's petition for habeas relief. View "Abernathy v. Wandes" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Adrian Patterson was convicted by jury trial of a number of drug charges, including conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. On appeal, Defendant raised a number of challenges to his conviction and sentence. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit concluded that none of the pretrial, trial, and sentencing claims had merit. As such, the Court held that (among other things) that the district court did not err in denying a competency hearing; declining to exclude evidence at trial on Fourth Amendment and hearsay grounds; conducting and instructing the jury; and sentencing Defendant. View "United States v. Patterson" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant George David Gordon was a former securities attorney convicted of multiple criminal charges relating to his alleged participation in a "pump-and-dump" scheme where he (along with others) violated the federal securities laws by artificially inflating the value of various stocks, then turning around and selling them for a substantial profit. The government restrained some of his property before the indictment was handed down and ultimately obtained criminal forfeiture of that property. On appeal, Defendant raised multiple issues relating to the validity of his conviction and sentence, and the propriety of the government’s conduct (both before and after trial) related to the forfeiture of his assets. In the end, the Tenth Circuit found no reversible error and affirmed Defendant's conviction and sentence, as well as the district court’s forfeiture orders. View "United States v. Gordon" on Justia Law

Plaintiffs-Appellants Bryan and JoLynne Toone executed a promissory note secured by a deed of trust on their home. The note was assigned several times. After the Toones defaulted on the Note, their home was scheduled to be sold at a trustee’s foreclosure sale. They filed suit to halt the foreclosure and to obtain damages and declaratory relief based on alleged violations of statutory and common-law duties by numerous parties who had current or prior interests in the Note and Trust Deed or were involved in the foreclosure efforts. The district court denied relief and the Toones appealed. Finding no abuse of the district court's discretion in denying the Toones relief, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision. View "Toone v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A." on Justia Law