November 7, 2024, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • NetChoice, L.L.C. v. Paxton, 21-51178, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • Oldham, J. (Jones, Southwick, Oldham), First Amendment
    • On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, remanding to the district court for further fact-findings: “In Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 2383 (2024), the Supreme Court emphasized that facial challenges to state laws are difficult to successfully mount. In the First Amendment context, such challenges require a court to ‘explore the law[’s] full range of applications—the constitutionally impermissible and permissible both—and compare the two sets.’ Id. at 2398 (emphasis added). Plaintiffs can meet this burden ‘only if the law’s unconstitutional applications substantially outweigh its constitutional ones.’ Id. at 2397. As the Supreme Court recognized, it is impossible to apply that standard here because ‘the record is underdeveloped.’ Id. at 2399. Who is covered by Texas House Bill 20? For these actors, which activities are covered by H.B. 20? For these covered activities, how do the covered actors moderate content? And how much does requiring each covered actor to explain its content-moderation decisions burden its expression? Because these are fact-intensive questions that must be answered by the district court in the first instance after thorough discovery, we remand.”

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Jimerson, 24-10394, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Carrizal-Osornia, 24-10397, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.
  • U.S. v. Webster, 24-10427, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Thornton v. Clinton, 24-10585, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Haynes, Higginson), prisoner suit
    • Dismissing as frivolous appeal of dismissal of Texas state prisoner’s § 1983 suit.
  • U.S. v. Vasquez, 23-11060, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jolly, Jones, Willett), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction for illegal reentry.
  • Goodwin v. Collins, 24-20061, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), prisoner suit
    • Affirming summary judgment dismissal of Texas state prisoner’s Eighth Amendment claim.
  • U.S. v. Bishop, 24-20156, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Haynes, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • Farwell v. Rushing, 22-20157, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Dennis, Southwick), § 1983
    • Affirming dismissal of § 1983 claims against privately retained attorney.
  • Thierry v. Serta Simmons Bedding, L.L.C., 23-20410, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Dennis, Southwick), bankruptcy
    • Dismissing for lack of jurisdiction direct appeal from three bankruptcy orders without meeting statutory conditions to bypass the district court’s first review.
  • U.S. v. Foreman, 24-30071, appeal from M.D. La.
    • per curiam (Jones, Dennis, Southwick), criminal, sentence reduction
    • Affirming denial of motion to reduce defendant’s 87-month concurrent sentences for her three wire fraud convictions.
  • Carter v. Bray, 24-30109, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Jones, Barksdale, Ho), civil
    • Affirming judgment in favor of defendants, with no description of the judgment or case [*ed. note: I hate it when the Court issues an “opinion” like this, not just because it makes it difficult to track meaningful information from it on my end, but there is no guidance to the parties or to future litigants; luckily, it happens only very rarely].
  • U.S. v. Bryant, 24-30131, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Haynes, Higginson, Douglas), criminal, sentence reduction
    • Affirming denial of motion to reduce 46-month sentence for conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • U.S. v. Mitchell, 23-30843, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Jolly, Higginson, Duncan), criminal
    • Affirming constitutionality of conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • U.S. v. Alexander, 23-30872, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Dennis, Ho, Oldham), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming 33-month sentence on conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon.
  • U.S. v. Davis, 23-30880, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Jones, Dennis, Southwick), criminal, sufficiency of evidence, search and seizure
    • Affirming conviction of possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine, finding sufficient evidence to support conviction and upholding denial of motion to suppress.
  • Serna v. City of Colorado Springs, 24-50019, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jones, Dennis, Southwick), taking, Rule 60, jurisdiction
    • Affirming denial of Rule 60 motion filed a year after dismissal for lack of jurisdiction of plaintiff’s taking claim.
  • Walker v. Wormuth, 24-50448, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Jolly, Jones, Willett), Administrative Procedure Act
    • Affirming dismissal as untimely the plaintiff’s APA claim arising from the denial of her request to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records.
  • U.S. v. Garrett, 24-60081, appeal from S.D. Miss.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, compassionate release
    • Affirming denial of motion for compassionate release.