December 11, 2023, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Pool v. City of Houston, 22-20491, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Oldham, J. (Jolly, Engelhardt, Oldham), jurisdiction, voting rights
    • Vacating district court’s declaratory judgment regarding the unconstitutionality of Houston’s voter-registration provisions, and remanding to the district court with instructions to dismiss without prejudice due to the lack of an Article III case or controversy.
    • The Court noted that the parties were in agreement throughout the litigation that the voter-registration provisions were unconstitutional, and that the City agreed it would not and could not enforce the provisions. Although the plaintiffs appealed the declaratory judgment because they sought different wording, the Court held that “there is no adversity and hence no Article III case or controversy. … Such faux disputes do not belong in federal court.”
  • U.S. v. Pierre, 22-20515, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Duncan, J. (Jones, Stewart, Duncan), criminal, evidence, jury instructions
    • Affirming defendant’s convictions of multiple drug crimes as the sole doctor at a “pill mill.” The Court found no reversible error in two issues the defendant failed to preserve at trial–the admission of allegedly improper profiling evidence and the instruction of the jury regarding whether the dispensing of the controlled substances fell within the “except as authorized” clause of 21 U.S.C. § 841.
    • The Court applied plain error review, as both issues had not been preserved at the district court.
    • The Court held that the testimony by government officers about how pill mills operate was not improper profiling evidence, but was admissible to explain how the drug trafficking operation would work, and that there was no instance of the testimony being used to “opine[] about Pierre’s mental state based merely on evidence of how pill mills generally operate–a hallmark of profiling testimony.”
    • The Court then held that, even if there were error in the district court’s jury instruction as to the “except as authorized” clause, any error did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights, as required under plain error review.

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Jackson, 22-30796, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Graves), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute heroin.
  • U.S. v. Luna, 22-51043, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Oldham, Wilson), criminal
    • Affirming conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
  • U.S. v. Hall, 23-10290, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Stewart, Southwick), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Martinez-Munoz, 23-10293, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Stewart, Southwick), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Wali, 23-10459, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Engelhardt, Wilson), criminal, sentencing, guilty plea
    • Dismissing appeal of 71-month sentence on conviction of possession of a machine gun, under the plea agreement’s appeal-waiver.
  • U.S. v. Onyegbu, 23-10595, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Higginson, Engelhardt), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Coats, 23-10895, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Haynes, Willett, Duncan), criminal, compassionate release
    • Dismissing as frivolous appeal from denial of motion for compassionate release.
  • U.S. v. Taylor, 23-20272, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Stewart, Southwick), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Jackson v. Bickham, 23-30337, appeal from M.D. La.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Haynes, Douglas), prisoner suit
    • Dismissing as frivolous appeal from dismissal of Louisiana state prisoner’s § 1983 claims.
  • U.S. v. Tut-Cucul, 23-50089, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Higginson, Engelhardt), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Hernandez, 23-50199, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (King, Haynes, Graves), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Moreno, 23-50338, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Willett, Duncan, Wilson), criminal, compassionate release
    • Affirming denial of motion for compassionate release.
  • Cortez-Albarron v. Garland, 23-60328, petition for review of BIA order
    • per curiam (Elrod, Oldham, Wilson), immigration
    • Denying Mexican citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying motion to reopen.