January 17-22, 2025, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • Uvukansi v. Guerrero, 23-20435, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Southwick, J. (Southwick, Haynes, Douglas), Haynes, J., concurring; habeas corpus
    • Affirming dismissal of § 2254 application based on holding that state court’s decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent, when the state court determined that false testimony from the sole identifying witness regarding his agreement with the prosecutor for a deal in his own prosecution and sentencing was overcome by testimony by another witness as to the agreement, such that the false testimony was immaterial.
    • Judge Haynes concurred, solely on the basis of the high standard under AEDPA; “[i]f the standard applied to the state court decision was any lower, I would vote for reversing because of the prosecutor’s conduct as discussed in the opinion.”
  • Texas v. U.S., 23-40653, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • Smith, J. (Smith, Clement, Higginson), immigration, standing, injunction, administrative law
    • Affirming as modified the district court’s preliminary injunction of the Department of Homeland Security’s Final Rule implementing the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, modifying that injunction to heed DACA’s severability provision and limiting the injunction from a nationwide injunction to a Texas-only injunction, preserving the district court’s stay of the injunction pending further appeal.
    • The Court, applying its rule of orderliness to a prior appeal in the case, held that Texas has standing to challenge the DACA final rule, based on Texas’s theory that “DACA recipients impose over $750 million in annual costs on the state, those costs are traceable to and exacerbated by the Final Rule, and a favorable judgment against DACA would at least partially alleviate Texas’s harm.”
    • The Court held that the DACA final rule “substantively violates the [Immigration and Naturalization Act]. … In the INA, Congress enacted a comprehensive federal statutory scheme for regulation of immigration and naturalization and set the terms and conditions of admission to the country. Because it chose not to include DACA recipients in that comprehensive scheme, Congress’s rigorous classification scheme forecloses the contrary scheme in the DACA Memorandum.” (Internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
    • While the Court held that vacatur was an appropriate APA remedy, and that the district court was not required instead to remand to the agency without vacatur, it agreed with the government that “the district court erred when it vacated the entire Rule instead of severing the Rule’s forbearance provisions from the work authorization provisions and vacating only the latter.”
    • The Court then held that the nationwide scope of the injunction was overly broad in that it applied relief beyond Texas, “the only state that has demonstrated injury.” “Remedies must be tailored to redress a plaintiff’s injury, and equitable remedies such as injunctions should not provide more relief than necessary to give the prevailing party the relief to which it is entitled. … Though universal relief may be an appropriate remedy in some circumstances, nationwide injunctions are not required or even the norm.” (Internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
  • Johnson v. Miller, 23-60199, appeal from N.D. Miss.
    • Willett, J. (Elrod, Willett, Duncan), First Amendment, timeliness
    • Reversing the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim under the Mississippi Whistleblower Protection Act, after certified question answered by the Mississippi Supreme Court that the MWPA was subject to a three-year statute of limitations rather than the Mississippi Tort Claims Act’s shorter period; reversing dismissal of later-added First Amendment retaliation claim, holding that the amendment related back because new information in that amendment was not necessary to found the First Amendment claim; but affirming dismissal of later-added breach of contract claim, finding that it did not relate back to the filing of the original complaint.

Unpublished

  • U.S. v. Gomez-Salinas, 23-11261, appeal from N.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Boykin, 23-20487, appeal from S.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Wiener, Ho, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming concurrent 516-month and 240-month sentences on conviction of deprivation of rights under color of law and destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in a federal investigation, upholding denial of motion for pretrial competency evaluation and reasonableness of sentence.
  • First Assembly of God Church Inc. of Leesville v. Church Mutual Insurance Co., 24-30173, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Dennis, Haynes, Ramirez), insurance, diversity jurisdiction
    • Remanding appeal of judgment in favor of plaintiff on jury verdict in insurance dispute, for district court to determine whether jurisdiction exists where parties only alleged domicile of corporate parties and not the principal place of business and the state of organization.
  • Brown v. Burmaster, 23-30180, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Richman, Graves, Wilson), qualified immunity
    • Dismissing for lack of jurisdiction the defendant’s appeal from the denial of a qualified immunity summary judgment.
  • U.S. v. Jones, 24-30479, appeal from W.D. La.
    • per curiam (Smith, Stewart, Duncan), criminal
    • Granting Anders motion to withdraw, and dismissing appeal.
  • U.S. v. Diaz, 23-30751, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (Jones, Barksdale, Ho), criminal, sentencing, restitution
    • Affirming conviction, sentence, and restitution award for bank fraud and money laundering.
  • U.S. v. Gomez, 24-50289, c/w U.S. v. Gomez-Guijarro, 24-50315, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Elrod, Haynes, Duncan), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming conviction and 87-month sentence for illegal reentry.
  • Cantu v. Austin Police Department, 24-50397, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Stewart, Southwick), qualified immunity, Americans with Disabilities Act
    • Affirming dismissal of ADA claim as a matter of law and dismissal of § 1983 claims on qualified immunity grounds, in claims arising from fatal shooting of plaintiffs’ son.
  • Cato v. Biden, 24-50464, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Stewart, Haynes, Higginson), prisoner suit
    • Dismissing as frivolous claims brought by Texas state pretrial detainee.
  • Lan v. University of Texas at San Antonio, 24-50546, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Davis, Smith, Higginson), Title VI, Title VII
    • Affirming summary judgment in favor of defendant university on plaintiff’s claims of national origin discrimination arising from her dismissal from Ph.D. program for poor grades.