Justia U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

The Southeastern Massachusetts Gang Task Force obtained warrants to arrest Roderiques, age 16, for drug trafficking and to search for cell phones and paperwork relating to cellular phone ownership at a house that Roderiques shared with Grupee and others. The officers discovered guns, drugs, and drug paraphernalia, as well as two cell phones, in Roderiques’s room. In Grupee’s room, they found a storage bin with Grupee’s personal papers, three pistols, and ammunition. A drug detection dog alerted toward a car parked in the driveway. The officers paused while they obtained warrants to search the house for firearms, drugs, and related materials and to search for the same in the car. In the rear seat they found a black gym bag with a bus ticket in Grupee’s name inside, a bag of cocaine, and a magazine of 9 millimeter ammunition. The second search of Grupee’s room uncovered more drugs and records of drug sales. Grupee entered a conditional plea to possession of firearms and ammunition as a felon, 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), and possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). The First Circuit affirmed denial of a motion to suppress. View "United States v. Grupee" on Justia Law

During 2000-2002, defendant and co-defendant were associated in five instances of depositing large bad checks (one for $15,000,000) in three different bank accounts (the one at issue in the name of a defunct corporation), then writing checks against the resulting, ostensible account balances or requesting substantial wire transfers from them. They were indicted for conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. 371, bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1344, wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1343, and money laundering, 18 U.S.C. 1957. Defendant was charged both as a principal and as aiding and abetting co-defendant, who negotiated guilty pleas. Defendant was convicted. He appealed, claiming insufficiency of the evidence to show anything more than his mere (innocent) presence at some events in the sequence of the transactions charged, and abridgement of his Sixth Amendment right to jury trial when the trial judge closed the courtroom doors during jury instructions. The First Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. Christi" on Justia Law

Plaintiff worked for the Puerto Rico Ports Authority. In 2006, Bonilla, PRPA's executive director, named the plaintiff to a trust position within the PRPA. At the time, the Popular Democratic Party held power in Puerto Rico. In 2008, plaintiff voluntarily resigned this post in order to accept a career position at the Marín International Airport in Carolina. Within months, he transferred to another career position as a security supervisor at Aguadilla airport. The PDP lost the general election in 2008, and its rival, the New Progressive Party, assumed office. In early 2009, plaintiff began experiencing workplace harassment, including banishment from the Aguadilla airport, transfer to the Mercedita airport in Ponce (far from his home), removal of his sidearm, a series of negative performance evaluations, and threats of suspension and termination. No legitimate reason supported any of these actions. The district court dismissed his claim of political discrimination. The First Circuit reversed. View "Grajales v. PR Ports Auth.l" on Justia Law

In 2007-2008, Textron made public statements assuring investors of the strength and depth of the backlog of orders to carry it through difficult economic times. In January 2008 an officer referred to "unusually low cancellations." Several similar statements followed. In a 2009 analyst report, J.P. Morgan wondered "how we go from 3.5 years of backlog six months ago to a 20% y/y production decline for 2009 that is only 80% sold out." Plaintiffs, purchasers of Textron securities, claim that for more than 18 months, Textron misstated the strength of the backlog. The complaint does not challenge the technical accuracy of most of Textron's statements, but claimed that Textron deliberately omitted material information, that Textron's officers could not have believed the truth of their unrelentingly positive statements, and that certain factual statements about cancellation figures were false when made. The main thrust of plaintiffs' complaint concerned failure to disclose information about the weakness of the backlog due to relaxed financing arrangements and other practices. The district court dismissed. The First Circuit affirmed. The complaint was deficient; the materiality issue was a close call, but the complaint failed to plead facts justifying a reasonable inference of scienter. View "Auto. Indus. Pension Trust Fund v. Textron Inc." on Justia Law

Defendants, convicted on charges of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute multi-kilogram quantities of controlled substances, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) and 846. The First Circuit affirmed, rejecting various challenges to the conduct of the trial. View "United States v. Mendez-Colon" on Justia Law

The Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles sought proposals from contractors to print and send registration renewal notices along with advertisements to raise revenue to defray costs. RMV would provide the contractor with information (name, address, date of birth, and license number) that was generally exempt from public disclosure under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. 2721-25, and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 4, sect. 7, cl. 26(n), that the contractor would need to safeguard from unlawful public disclosure. Defendant's winning bid indicated that it understood and accepted the terms. The contract specified that Massachusetts would continue to exercise ownership over all personal data, and that a violation of the DPPA or the Massachusetts privacy law would cause the contract to terminate. Plaintiff, who received a registration renewal notice that included advertisements, filed a putative class action on behalf of himself and other drivers who, without providing consent, had received advertisements from defendant. The district court granted defendant judgment on the pleadings based on failure to join the Commonwealth as an indispensable party. The First Circuit affirmed, finding no violation of the DPPA. Defendant does not disclose the information it legitimately receives, as the state's contractor, to others. View "Downing v. Globe Direct LLC" on Justia Law

Plaintiff contracted to sell a furniture business to Mendoza in 2004. Westernbank provided partial funding and obtained a first mortgage. To secure a deferred payment of $750,000, Mendoza signed a mortgage in favor of plaintiff and a contract under which plaintiff consigned goods with expected sales value of more than $6,000,000. An account was opened at Westernbank for deposit of sales proceeds. Plaintiff alleges that Westernbank kept funds to which plaintiff was entitled for satisfaction of Mendoza’s debts to Westernbank. Mendoza filed for bankruptcy and transferred its real estate to Westernbank in exchange for release of debt to the bank. Plaintiff agreed to forgive unpaid debts in order to obtain relief from the stay and foreclose its mortgage, then sued Westernbank, employees, and insurers, alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. 1961-68, and Puerto Rico law causes of action. After BPPR became successor to Westernbank, plaintiff agreed to dismiss the civil law fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims and the RICO claim. The district court later dismissed remaining claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over non-federal claims. The First Circuit affirmed. View "Fabrica de Muebles J.J. Alvare v. Inversiones Mendoza, Inc." on Justia Law

After defendant had sexually-explicit online communications with a detective, posing as a 14-year-old, the detective researched defendant’s criminal history, which included convictions for public lewdness and disorderly conduct, obtained a warrant, and searched defendant’s home. Finding child pornography on a computer, police obtained a second warrant and discovered 3,366 images of child pornography, 95 emails sent from the computer with child pornography attachments, and 54 emails received with child pornography attachments. A district judge denied defendant's motion to suppress the fruits of the search of his home computer. Defendant pled guilty to unlawful transportation of child pornography, 18 U.S.C. 2252A(a)(1) and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. The First Circuit affirmed denial of the motion, rejecting arguments that: the warrant allowed a search that was overbroad given the narrow scope of probable cause; the computer search unlawfully exceeded the broad scope of the warrant; and the plain-view and good-faith exceptions did not apply. View "United States v. Farlow" on Justia Law

In 2010d Goergen pled guilty to four counts of sexual exploitation of children, 18 U.S.C. 2251(a). Over several years, Goergen arranged for and took still pictures and videos of three minor girls engaged in explicit sexual activities or poses and then distributed the material. Georgen received a sentence of 60 years in prison, and appealed only the sentence. The First Circuit affirmed. The sentence is under the statutory maximum and, fairly viewed as effectively a life sentence, is what the guidelines recommended. It is a very grave sentence but, so were the crimes and their consequences for the victims. View "United States v. Goergen" on Justia Law