Justia U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

Federal inmate Petitioner-Appellant Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri appealed a district court’s judgment that denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant was serving a 100-month federal sentence for conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization (al-Qaeda). He contended that he was entitled to Good Conduct Time (GCT) for the 71 months he was held as a material witness and an enemy combatant. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the district court did not agree. On appeal to the Tenth Circuit, appellant claimed that he was entitled to a GCT calculation under 18 U.S.C. 3624(b), or as an equitable remedy for his allegedly unconstitutional detention. Finding no error in the district court's decision, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of relief. View "Al-Marri v. Davis" on Justia Law

Pro se Petitioner prisoner Terry Lee Childs appealed a district court's dismissal of his civil rights case filed under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Petitioner was housed at the James Crabtree Correctional Center (JCCC) in Helena, Oklahoma, but he was formerly housed at the Lawton Correctional Facility (LCF) in Lawton. Petitioner filed his complaint asserting that defendants, who were all employees of LCF, violated state and federal law by delaying the refilling of his asthma medication prescription in May 2008 in retaliation against him for exercising his federal constitutional right to file administrative grievances about his medical care. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), or, in the alternative, for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The magistrate judge recommended that defendants' motion to dismiss be granted with respect to Petitioner's two state-law claims. But the magistrate judge concluded that Petitioner's federal claim for retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights was not conclusory and recommended that it be allowed to proceed. Petitioner filed objections to the recommendation, as did defendants. The district court disagreed with the magistrate judge's recommendation as to the federal claim and entered an order granting defendants' motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) as to all three claims. The district court ultimately granted Petitioner four extensions of time to file his amended complaint, but gave him a final deadline of February 1, 2012, and warned him not to expect any further extensions of time. On February 9, 2012, Petitioner filed an untimely proposed amended complaint and requested a fifth extension of time. Defendants opposed the motion. The district court determined that Petitioner failed to correct the defects in his existing retaliation claim and had also added a new claim (without leave of court) based on seventeen pages of new factual allegations. The court denied Petitioner's motion for a fifth extension of time and his motion to file his proposed amended complaint, and entered a judgment of dismissal. Petitioner appealed the dismissal of his original complaint. Finding no abuse of discretion, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "Childs v. Miller" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Eric Madrid appealed his conviction on one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant pled guilty to the charge but preserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Before the Tenth Circuit, Defendant asserted that the evidence against him resulted from an investigatory stop that lacked reasonable suspicion in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Finding no error in the district court's decision, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. Madrid" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Christopher Lucero appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence. Defendant was sentenced before the effective date of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA). He asserted that the district court erred in failing to apply the FSA and its current statutory mandatory minimum sentencing scheme retroactively to reduce his sentence for possession of cocaine base. "At the heart of Lucero's argument lies the issue of whether the reduction of his sentence post FSA is a sentencing to which the FSA's reduced mandatory minimums apply. The Tenth Circuit was not persuaded by Defendant's arguments for retroactive application of the FSA, and affirmed his original sentence. View "United States v. Lucero" on Justia Law

A jury convicted Defendant Theodore "Cush" McDowell of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana. Prior to trial, Defendant unsuccessfully sought to suppress evidence seized in the house where he was arrested. He appealed the denial of his motion to suppress as well as two sentencing issues. Finding no error in the district court's denial or sentence, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. McDowell" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant David Shuck was charged with five counts: conspiracy to manufacture 100 or more marijuana plants; the manufacture of 100 or more marijuana plants; two counts of the use and maintenance of a place for the purpose of manufacturing marijuana; and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Defendant entered a conditional guilty plea on all five counts and was sentenced in 2012 to eighteen months. Defendant argued to the Tenth Circuit that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress, and that the district erred in denying his motion for an additional downward departure in sentencing. Finding no error, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court. View "United States v. Shuck" on Justia Law

Defendant Abasi Baker was convicted on seven counts each of robbery affecting commerce, use of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant appealed his convictions, raising two arguments: (1) that use of a global-positioning-system (GPS) tracking device on his car violated his Fourth Amendment rights, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him on the eight firearms counts associated with the first four robberies. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit did not reach the merits of Defendant’s Fourth Amendment argument because he waived it by failing to raise it before trial. And the Court rejected Defendant’s argument that the evidence was insufficient for a rational jury to find that he possessed the identified firearm at the times charged. View "United States v. Baker" on Justia Law

Prisoner-Petitioner Gary Abernathy appealed a district court judgment which dismissed his petition for the writ of habeas corpus. On appeal to the Tenth Circuit, petitioner argued that the district court miscalculated his sentence based on an allegedly faulty interpretation of United States Supreme Court precedent in "Chambers v. United States" (555 U.S. 122 (2009)). Finding no error with the district court's calculation, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that court's judgment and dismissed Petitioner's petition for habeas relief. View "Abernathy v. Wandes" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Adrian Patterson was convicted by jury trial of a number of drug charges, including conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. On appeal, Defendant raised a number of challenges to his conviction and sentence. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit concluded that none of the pretrial, trial, and sentencing claims had merit. As such, the Court held that (among other things) that the district court did not err in denying a competency hearing; declining to exclude evidence at trial on Fourth Amendment and hearsay grounds; conducting and instructing the jury; and sentencing Defendant. View "United States v. Patterson" on Justia Law

Defendant-Appellant Joseph Benoit was convicted of receipt of child pornography and possession of child pornography for which he was sentenced to concurrent terms of 125 and 120 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution. He challenged his convictions and sentence on multiple grounds, namely that: (1) the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his computer; (2) conviction of receipt and possession of child pornography was a violation of Double Jeopardy; and (3) that the district court's restitution order was improper. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit agreed with Defendant's second contention, that possession was a lesser included offense of receipt in cases in which the same child pornography forms the basis of each charge. The Court also found that with regard to its restitution order, the district court did not explain whether specific losses suffered by the victim were proximately caused by Benoit's actions. The Tenth Circuit remanded the case for a redetermination of the portion of damages allocable to Defendant. The Court affirmed as to Defendant's numerous remaining claims. View "United States v. Benoit" on Justia Law