OPINIONS ARE POSTED DAILY BETWEEN 10:00 and 11:00 a.m.


Current Opinions are for Friday, August 12, 2022 

DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                           as a courtesy to the reader.  They are not part of the opinion of the court.

211035U.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Jeffrey Schlegel
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-1035
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Central   
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Chief Judge, and Gruender and 
   Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not commit any 
   procedural error in determining defendant's sentence, as the district 
   court considered and weighed the relevant factors, including defendant's 
   mitigating factors; defendant's sentence, a downward variance from his 
   advisory guidelines range, was not substantively unreasonable. 
  
212287U.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Alfonso Gill
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-2287
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City   
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Chief Judge, and Wollman and 
   Grasz, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Defendant moved to reduce his revocation 
   sentence under the First Step Act; the district court found defendant was 
   eligible for a reduction but then erred by not calculating defendant's 
   amended revocation sentencing range under the Guidelines before deciding 
   whether to grant relief, which it was required to do; the revocation 
   sentence is vacated, and the matter is remanded for resentencing. 
  
213130P.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Jeff Harris
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-3130
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Kelly and Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court did not err by granting the 
   government's motion for an upward departure pursuant to Guidelines 
   Sections 5K2.1 and 5K2.0 where defendant distributed fentanyl resulting in 
   death; the sentencing record was sufficient for the court to find the 
   investigating officer's testimony, to the extent it included hearsay, bore 
   sufficient indicia of reliability to support its use in sentencing 
   defendant, and the court did not clearly err in finding the government 
   proved by a preponderance of the evidence that a death resulted from 
   defendant's conduct; the sentence is consistent with upward departures 
   this court has approved under Sec. 5K2.1 for drug distribution resulting 
   in an overdose. 
  
213225U.pdf     08/12/2022  Veronica Araujo  v.  Merrick Garland
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-3225
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals   
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Melloy, and Stras, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Petition for Review - Immigration. The agency did not abuse its discretion 
   in denying petitioner's motion to reopen her removal proceedings; to the 
   extent petitioner challenges the denial of her underlying application for 
   relief, the petition is dismissed because she failed to file a timely 
   petition for review of the BIA's order dismissing her appeal, and the 
   court lacks jurisdiction to consider the arguments. 
  
213336P.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Zachary Anderson Wailes
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-3336
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Central   
   [PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Arnold and Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Based on this sentencing record, the district 
   court did not err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 
   2B3.1(b)(2)(C) for possession of a firearm during the course of the bank 
   robbery. 
  
213399P.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Seth Huntington
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-3399
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Stras, Melloy, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Defendant's two convictions for third-degree 
   assault in violation of Minn. Stat. Sec. 609.2 were violent felonies for 
   purposes of ACCA sentencing; defendant's first-degree burglary with 
   assault conviction in violation of Minn. Stat. Sec. 609.582, subdiv. 1(c) 
   was also a violent felony for ACCA purposes, and the district court did 
   not err in sentencing defendant as an Armed Career Criminal. 
  
213448P.pdf     08/12/2022  United States  v.  Lamark Combs, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  21-3448
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern   
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Erickson, and Stras, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Defendant objected to a portion of the PSR 
   which stated he was responsible for receiving pornographic images from 
   other victims, but the matter was not raised or resolved at sentencing; by 
   not raising the matter at sentencing, defendant forfeited the claim; 
   however, on plain error review, it is clear that the district court 
   substantially increased defendant's sentence based on the objected-to 
   conduct; the error is plain, and the matter is remanded for resentencing; 
   it will be up to the district court to determine whether to reopen the 
   record for additional evidence on remand.