May 9, 2022, opinions

Catching up on the blog after some non-stop over-drive briefing weeks, so both published and unpublished opinions will only contain summary disposition information and not the usual fuller descriptions.

Designated for publication

  • U.S. v. Tucker, 21-30194, appeal from M.D. La.
    • Willett, J. (Willett, Engelhardt, Wilson), criminal
    • Reversing conviction of three counts of making false statements to a federally licensed firearms dealer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and two counts of possession, on basis that district court plainly erred by allowing constructive amendment of indictment.
  • U.S. v. Brooks, 21-60633, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • Engelhardt, J. (Willett, Engelhardt, Wilson), criminal
    • Affirming district court’s denial of motions to discontinue or modify defendant’s conditional release.


  • Rubio v. Lumpkin, 20-20158, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Willett, Engelhardt, Wilson), habeas corpus
    • Affirming denial of sec. 2254 petition.
  • Roque v. Shrode, 20-40153, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Jones, Elrod), prisoner suit
    • Affirming dismissal of prisoner’s sec. 1983 complaint.
  • U.S. v. Rodriguez-Huitron, 21-10082, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Willett, Engelhardt, Wilson), criminal
    • Affirming conviction of illegal reentry, as reformed to reflect a conviction and sentence under § 1326(b)(1).
  • U.S. v. Grant, 21-20573, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Higginson, Willett), habeas corpus
    • Denying COA and affirming judgment on alternative grounds denying sec. 2255 petition, as the denial of a writ of coram nobis.
  • Celino v. Biotronik, Inc., 21-30626, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Higginson, Duncan), products liability
    • Affirming summary judgment in favor of manufacturer of cardioverter defibrillator dismissing product liability claims.