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

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court convicting Defendant of three drug trafficking offenses after law enforcement officers discovered cocaine and heroin inside of his vehicle, holding that the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress.In his motion to suppress, Defendant argued that the officers stopped his vehicle without reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and therefore, the drugs found inside of the vehicle were inadmissible as evidence. The district court denied Defendant's motion to suppress. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the officers had probable cause to arrest Defendant when they conducted the vehicle containment in this case. View "United States v. Gonzalez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's sentence imposed in connection with his conviction of possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, holding that the sentencing outcome was defensible.Defendant pled guilty to possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon. The district court concluded that a forty-six-month term of immurement was an appropriate punishment and sentenced him to an incarcerative sentence of that length. Defendant appealed, arguing that, in fashioning his sentence, the district court overemphasized aggravating factors and overlooked mitigating factors. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Defendant's sentence was neither procedurally nor substantively unreasonable. View "United States v. Ruperto-Rivera" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendants' convictions of multiple counts of introducing through their work at the New England Compounding Center (NECC) "misbranded" drugs into interstate commerce with the intent to defraud or mislead, holding that there was no error or abuse of discretion.Defendants Kathy Chin and Michelle Thomas worked at NECC, a compounding pharmacy that distributed a contaminated medication that led to illnesses and deaths of patients across the country. Defendants were among fourteen individuals affiliated with NECC who were charged with criminal offenses related to the contaminated medication. A jury found Defendants guilty of the counts that each faced. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) Defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence; (2) the statute setting forth the underlying offense was not void for vagueness as applied to Defendants; and (3) none of Defendants' grounds for overturning the district court's rulings under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 had merit. View "United States v. Chin" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the district court's entry of summary judgment on Count I of Plaintiff's complaint seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. 1983 but reversed the entry of summary judgment on Count IX, holding that unconstitutional conduct of police officers violated the clearly established law of the Supreme Court, as set forth in Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1, 6 (2013).Plaintiff brought this complaint against the Town of Orono, the chief of the Orono Police Department, and four police officers with whom he interacted during two encounters in 2016 - one in February and one in September - both of which resulted in his being arrested without a warrant on charges that were subsequently dropped. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants. The First Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that the district court (1) correctly granted summary judgment on Count I relating to the February incident; but (2) erred in granting summary judgment on Count IX relating to the September incident. View "French v. Merrill" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's consecutive upwardly variant sentences imposed in two criminal cases, holding that both sentences were procedurally and substantively reasonable.While on bail pending trial for drug and firearm-related charges, Defendant was arrested and charged in a separate case with receipt of a firearm while under indictment for a felony. Defendant pleaded guilty to the firearm offenses in both cases and requested to be sentenced for both counts of conviction in a single proceeding. The district court granted the requested and sentenced Defendant to upwardly variant sentences. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Defendant's sentences in both cases were procedurally reasonable and substantively reasonable. View "United States v. Vargas-Martinez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Francis Lang's petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to vacate his Massachusetts conviction for murder in the first degree, holding that the district court did not err in denying the petition.Lang was convicted in a Massachusetts court for murder in the first degree. In this action, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254, Lang sought to vacate his conviction, arguing that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to investigate Lang's mental health history. The district court denied the petition. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Defendant failed to establish prejudice under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). View "Lang v. DeMoura" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's twelve-year sentence imposed in connection with his conviction for bank robbery, holding that none of Defendant's contentions on appeal had merit.A jury found Defendant guilty of one count of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2113(a). In sentencing Defendant, the district court varied downward, sentencing him to a prison term of 144 months. Defendant appealed, arguing that the district court erred in classifying him as a career offender. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court did not err in treating Defendant's prior state-court marijuana conviction as a controlled substance offense under the career-offender provision of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. View "United States v. Crocco" on Justia Law

The First Circuit reversed the decision of the district court granting Appellants' motions brought under Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 for a post-verdict judgment of acquittal on the charge of conspiring to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371, holding that the district court erred in granting the motions.These consolidated appeals stemmed from the federal criminal investigation into the operations of the New England Compounding Center (NECC), a licensed pharmacy, after patients across the country became ill or died from a contaminated medication. Appellants were Sharon Carter and Gregory Conigliaro, who were, respectively, NECC's former director of operations and NECC's former vice president and general manager. A jury found both Appellants guilty of violating section 371. The district court granted Appellants' motions for a judgment of acquittal on the section 371 count. The First Circuit reversed, holding that there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the convictions. View "United States v. Carter" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendants' convictions connected with the murder of Steven DiSarro, holding that Defendants were not entitled to relief on their allegations of error.Defendants, Francis Salemme and Paul Weadick, were convicted of the 1993 murder of DiSarro. At the time of the murder, Salemme was the boss of a criminal organization known as the New England La Cosa Nostra. Defendants murdered DiSarro to prevent him from talking with federal agents about his activities with Salemme, Weadick and Salemme's son. On appeal, Defendants challenged the trial court's admission of a significant amount of evidence concerning the prior criminal activities of Salemme and several witnesses. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court did not err in admitting the evidence. View "United States v. Weadick" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court convicting Defendant of making false statements on certain government forms, theft of government property, and failing to disclose an event that affected Defendant's right to Social Security payments, holding that Defendant's claims on appeal were without merit.Defendant suffered a work injury while working as a mechanic for the United States Postal Service (USPS) and began receiving worker's compensation and Social Security disability benefits. After Defendant had been receiving benefits for several years, the USPS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) began investigating the case and determined that Defendant had continued working and volunteering with his union without disclosing the activities as required. The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's convictions, holding (1) sufficient evidence supported the convictions; (2) the district court properly granted the government's motion in limine preventing Defendant from presenting certain evidence; and (3) there was no error in the sentence imposed by the district court. View "United States v. Rivera-Ortiz" on Justia Law