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

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court granting motions to dismiss filed by defendants Charles Taylor Consulting Mexico, S.A. de C.V., James Heiden, and Pierre Barron (collectively, Charles Taylor) and Universal Insurance Co. for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq., holding that there was no error.Plaintiffs OK Resorts of Puerto Rico, Inc., Executive Fantasy Hotel, Inc., and Riverside Resort, Inc. (collectively, OK Resorts) brought this action against Charles Taylor under RICO and Puerto Rico law. The district court granted Charles Taylor's motions to dismiss after the agreed-upon discovery deadline had passed. On appeal, OK Resorts argued that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing he amended complaint at the time it did. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion. View "OK Resorts of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Charles Taylor Consulting Mexico, S.A. de C.V." on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's conviction of one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and one count of importation of cocaine and his sentence of a term of imprisonment of 120 months to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release, holding that there was no error in the proceedings below.Specifically, the First Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in (1) admitting evidence, including the testimony of a canine handler that a drug sniffing dog alerted to Defendant vehicle eighteen days prior as "other-acts" evidence pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b); (2) admitting testimony of a Homeland Security Investigations agent about the practices of drug traffickers smuggling drugs into Puerto Rico as that of a lay witness opinion pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 701; and (3) failing sua sponte to order a competency evaluation prior to or during Defendant's sentencing hearing. View "United States v. Agramonte-Quezada" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court convicting Defendant, pursuant to a jury verdict, of conspiracy to commit a robbery, committing the robbery, and discharging a firearm in relation to a crime of violence resulting in death, holding that none of Defendant's challenges on appeal had merit.After a jury found Defendant guilty of all counts the district court sentenced him to thirty years in prison. The First Circuit affirmed the judgment, holding (1) there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions; (2) Defendant failed to preserve any objection to the use of a Pinkerton instruction; and (3) Defendant's evidentiary challenges were unavailing. View "United States v. Serrano-Delgado" on Justia Law

The First Circuit vacated Defendant's sentence imposed in connection with his plea of guilty to illegally possessing a machine gun and remanded the case for resentencing, holding that the judge's sentence "explanation" was reversible error.The crime for which Defendant was convicted carried a top prison term of ten years. Defendant sought a term of twenty-four months, and the government sought thirty months. The judge varied the sentence to sixty months because, in part, Defendant had a track record of engaging in drug offenses and weapon violations. Defendant appealed, challenging the procedural and substantive reasonableness of the judge's decision. The First Circuit vacated the sentence, holding that because the trial judge gave "weight" to arrests not backed by "convictions or independent proof of conduct," Defendant's sentence could not stand. View "United States v. Torres-Melendez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court granting the separate post-verdict motions for judgment of acquittal filed by the two defendants in this case, Eddie Guerrero-Narvaez and Kayvan Cartagena-Suarez, holding that there was no error.After a jury trial, Defendants were convicted of aiding and abetting each other in the commission of a carjacking. Defendants subsequently filed separate post-verdict motions for judgment of acquittal. The district court granted Guerrero-Narvaez's motion, ruling that no reasonable trier of fact could find from the evidence presented at trial that Guerrero-Narvaez possessed the requisite specific intent to violate the federal carjacking statute. The court then granted Cartagena-Suarez's motion as well. The government appealed. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the evidence did not support the jury's conclusion that Cartagena-Suarez possessed the necessary intent. View "United States v. Guerrero-Narvaez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Appellant's plea of guilty to one count of investment adviser fraud, four counts of wire fraud, and one count of aggravated identity theft, holding that there was no prejudicial error in the proceedings below.On appeal, Appellant argued that her plea was not knowing and voluntary, that the evidence was insufficient to convict her of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, that several sentencing enhancements were improperly applied, and that her counsel was ineffective. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) there was no error in the district court's acceptance of Appellant's guilty plea; (2) Appellant's conduct clearly satisfied the statutory requirements for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft; and (3) Appellant's challenges to several aspects of her sentence were unavailing. View "United States v. Kitts" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, holding that the district court did not err in its application of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. 924(e)(1) and in its imposition of a mandatory fifteen-year sentence.Defendant pled guilty to a felon in possession charge. The district court concluded that, due to his four prior Maine burglary convictions, Defendant qualified for the ACCA's enhanced mandatory minimum penalty, and sentenced Defendant to fifteen years' imprisonment. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not err in applying the ACCA to Defendant based on his prior burglary convictions in Maine; and (2) this Court declines to overturn its prior decision in United States v. Duquette, 778 F.3d 314 (1st Cir. 2015), and its application of the categorical approach to the statute at issue here. View "United States v. Bowers" on Justia Law

The First Circuit dismissed Defendants' appeals from the trial court's refusal to dismiss their indictments, holding that this Court lacked jurisdiction to review before final judgment the district court's order denying Defendants' motions to dismiss.A United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts charged Massachusetts state district court judge Shelley Joseph and Wesley MacGregor, her courtroom deputy, for allegedly interfering with the enforcement of federal immigration law. Defendants filed motions to dismiss their indictments based on Judge Joseph's claim of absolute judicial immunity and on their contention that their prosecution was unconstitutional. The district court denied the motions to dismiss, and Defendants appealed. The First Circuit dismissed the appeals as premature, holding that, at this stage in the proceedings, this Court had no jurisdiction to review the merits of the district court's rulings. View "United States v. Joseph" on Justia Law

The First Circuit vacated Defendant's sentence of ninety months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release for his conviction for one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), holding that the evidence did not support the application of a sentencing enhancement.On appeal, Defendant argued that his sentence could not stand because it was predicated on the application of a four-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) that the record did not support. Defendant argued that the district court erred in applying the enhancement, which was based on Defendant's possession of firearms "in connection with drug trafficking, a felony offense," because it improperly relied on a conclusory allegation that Defendant was working as an armed enforcer for a drug trade organization. The First Circuit vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing, holding that the evidence did not support the sentencing enhancement's application. View "United States v. Carrion-Melendez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit dismissed as moot Gary Lee Sampson's appeal from his death sentence for murder and declined to exercise its equitable discretion to vacate the death sentence, holding that Sampson's convictions, life sentence, and death sentence remain intact.Following a retrial, a unanimous jury sentenced Sampson to death for committing a murder. Sampson appealed. While his appeal was pending, Sampson died in prison. The First Circuit held (1) the parties correctly agree that Sampson's underlying convictions and life sentence cannot, as a matter of law, be vacated; and (2) as to the death sentence, the appeal was moot. View "United States v. Sampson" on Justia Law