September 9, 2024, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • U.S. v. Gonzales, 22-51077, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • Jones, J. (King, Jones, Oldham), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming district court’s determination that federal sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon would run consecutively with state-court sentence and that defendant would not get 43 months’ credit for time spent serving sentence on state conviction.
  • J.A. Masters Investments v. Beltramini, 23-20292, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Haynes, Willett, Oldham), Haynes, J., diversity jurisdiction
    • Remanding to district court to make determinations of parties’ citizenship for diversity jurisdiction purposes, as the record only contained allegations and findings of the parties’ residence; and holding to be legally ineffective the district court’s grant of a motion filed by the parties after the appeal was taken, to “confirm diversity jurisdiction,” under the one-court-at-a-time doctrine.
    • Judge Haynes dissented. “Given that the district court has already addressed the diversity, but the majority is concerned, the majority could request that the parties amend in the appellate court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653 (‘Defective allegations of jurisdiction may be amended, upon terms, in the trial or appellate courts.’ (emphasis added)). However, I am not seeking that. I think we should conclude diversity has been established. I respectfully disagree with ordering a remand requiring the district court to say it again.”
  • U.S. v. Aguilar-Torres, 23-50866, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Willett, Engelhardt), Willett, J., dissenting; criminal, sentencing
    • Dismissing appeal of conviction and sentence for illegal reentry, where the defendant moved for summary disposition affirming his conviction on the basis that he knew that his appeal was foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres but that the appeal was taken purely to preserve the issue. The Court held that the appellant’s movement for summary disposition affirming the judgment of the district court left no controversy to decide and thereby deprived the Court of appellate jurisdiction.
    • Judge Willett dissented. He took issue with the dismissal of the appeal coming on an issue for which it did not seek briefing from the parties. Moreover, “I fail to see a meaningful difference between (1) conceding that an argument is foreclosed by controlling precedent, and (2) acquiescing in the only judgment that we can provide based on that concession. A party who has conceded that his argument cannot win is a party who has already accepted the fate of an adverse legal judgment. And if a party has already accepted that inevitability, it is a small, if not inconsequential, step for that party to move for that judgment himself. More concretely, I fail to see the difference between a defendant such as Aguilar-Torres moving for summary affirmance on the one hand and the Government moving for summary affirmance unopposed on the other. In either case, both parties accept the same judgment. No adversity detected.”

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Leal, 23-10818, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Nassar, 23-20132, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Willett, Engelhardt), criminal, guilty plea
    • Affirming guilty plea conviction of bank fraud, holding immaterial technical deviations from Rule 11 by district court.
  • Crawford v. Harden, 23-40230, appeal from E.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Higginbotham, Jones, Oldham), prisoner suit
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of Texas state prisoner’s claims.
  • U.S. v. Maldonado, 23-40710, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Huertas, 24-10061, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Johnson v. Seagraves Compress, 24-10425, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jolly, Higginson, Duncan), employment discrimination
    • Affirming dismissal of employment discrimination claim as untimely.
  • U.S. v. Simpson, 24-60046, appeal from N.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 120-month sentence on conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • Lovelace v. Pollan, 24-60075, appeal from N.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Barksdale, Haynes, Wilson), qualified immunity
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of sec. 1983 claims on qualified immunity grounds.