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

The First Circuit vacated the judgment of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of Petitioner's application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), holding that substantial evidence did not support the BIA's decision.The immigration judge (IJ) determined that Petitioner was not a credible witness and therefore found that he had failed to establish his burden of proof with respect to his application. The BIA dismissed Petitioner's appeal, thus declining to remand the case in light of new evidence submitted for the first time on appeal. The First Circuit vacated the BIA's decision, holding that the IJ's adverse credibility finding was not supportable. View "Cuesta-Rojas v. Garland" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the district court's order denying Defendant's motion for resentencing, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.In 2008, Defendant pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine base. While Defendant was serving his 228-month term of immurement Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act, Pub. L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. 2372, which reduced the penalties for most federal crimes involving crack cocaine. Thereafter, Defendant filed his motion for resentencing. The district court denied the motion. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the sentencing court weighed the proper factors and made a reasonable judgment. View "United States v. Concepcion" on Justia Law

The First Circuit denied Defendant's appeal of his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g) and 924(a)(2), holding that the district court did not commit plain error by accepting Defendant's guilty plea and in denying his motion to suppress.Following Defendant's plea, the Supreme Court decided Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019), under which the government must prove that the defendant knew he had the relevant status prohibiting possession. On appeal, Defendant argued (1) under Rehaif, the district court committed plain error during his plea colloquy by failing to inform him that the government was required to prove that he knew he was prohibited from possessing firearms; and (2) the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the search warrant issued for Defendant's residence was supported by probable cause; and (2) the district court did not plainly err by accepting Defendant's guilty plea. View "United States v. Austin" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed Defendant's eighteen-month sentence imposed for violating the conditions of his supervised release by committing a new crime, holding that Defendant had not suffered any prejudice from the delay in his supervised release revocation hearing.The revocation hearing concluded thirty months after the the United States Probation Office petitioned the district court to revoke supervised release and eight months after Defendant was taken into federal custody. On appeal, Defendant argued that his revocation hearing was unreasonably delayed in violation of his rights under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1 and the due process clause of the United States Constitution. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that Defendant's claim failed on the prejudice prong. View "United States v. Torres-Santana" on Justia Law

The First Circuit dismissed this appeal of the district court's order sentencing Defendant to a seventy-eight-month term of immurement to be followed by five years of supervised release, holding that the court did not err by denying Defendant's request that the incarcerative portion of the sentence be ordered to run concurrently with any period of incarceration that might thereafter be imposed by the Puerto Rico courts in consequence of Defendant's violation of probation.Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography. The agreement contained a waiver-of-appeal provision stipulating that, if the imprisonment sentence imposed was seventy-eight months, Defendant waived the right to appeal any aspect of the court's judgment and sentence. After Defendant was sentenced he challenged the district court's failure to run his sentence concurrently with any sentence that any Puerto Rico court might impose for the probation violation. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that there was no miscarriage of justice granting Defendant an exception to the enforcement of his appeal waiver. View "United States v. O'farrill-Lopez" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court denying the Municipality of Canovanas's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to overturn the default judgment entered for Plaintiffs on Plaintiffs' claims brought under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), 42 U.S.C. 1395dd, and Puerto Rico law, holding that Canovanas's arguments were unavailing.Plaintiffs, Julio Carrasquillo-Serrano (Carrasquillo) and his family, alleged that Canovanas owned, operated, and/or managed CDT of Canovanas, the emergency medical facility that provided medical services to Carrasquillo and that Carrasquillo was permanently disabled as a result of Defendants' negligence. The district court entered judgment for Plaintiffs. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the judgment was not void for lack of jurisdiction; (2) service of process was sufficient; (3) a statutory limitation of liability is an affirmative defense; and (4) the district court had jurisdiction to determine the merits of Plaintiffs' EMTALA claims. View "Carrasquillo-Serrano v. Municipality of Canovanas" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court denying Defendant's motion to strike the federal government's notice of intent to seek the death penalty (Death Notice) that was untimely filed, holding that the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motions to strike the Death Notice.Under the Local Rules for the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico the federal government, if seeking the death penalty, must file a Death Notice within 180 days of an indictment containing a death-eligible offense. A Puerto Rico federal grand jury returned a five-count indictment charging Defendant with three offenses punishable by death. The government, however, did not file a Death Notice until after the 180-day deadline had expired. After Defendant unsuccessfully moved to strike the death penalty he appealed. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to strike without an evidentiary hearing because the purpose of the Local Criminal Rule was satisfied and the untimely filed Death Notice did not prejudice Defendant. View "United States v. Pedro-Vidal" on Justia Law

The First Circuit reversed the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying Petitioner's request to reopen removal proceedings based on changed country circumstances, holding that the BIA's failure to assess whether certain changes were sufficient was arbitrary and capricious.Petitioner, a native and citizen of Albania, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture, arguing that he and his family had been persecuted due to Petitioner's support of the Democratic Party in Albania and that the family had a well-founded fear of future persecution. An immigration judge denied relief, and the BIA affirmed. Petitioner later asked the BIA to reopen his case on the ground that government corruption had deteriorated in Albania. The BIA denied the request. The First Circuit reversed, holding that the BIA "exercised its judgment in an arbitrary, capricious, or irrational manner." View "Lucaj v. Wilkinson" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the trial court convicting Defendants - Rolando Millan-Machuca, Roberto Casado-Berrios, Miguel Rivera-Calcano, and Giordano Santana-Meledez - of racketeering and drug trafficking conspiracies, holding that Defendants' claims on appeal were unavailing.Specifically, the First Circuit held (1) the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions; (2) there was no merit to Defendants' claims of error in the admission of certain evidence; (3) Defendants' sentences were reasonable; and (4) Rivera-Calcano's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel at his sentencing hearing is dismissed without prejudice. View "United States v. Millan-Machuca" on Justia Law

The First Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court dismissing this putative class action complaint brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., holding that the district court did not err or abuse its discretion.Plaintiffs claimed that FMR LLC and several related Fidelity entities and affiliates (collectively, Fidelity) violated fiduciary duties it owed to its customer plans and their participants by exacting and retaining certain fees. The fees were exacted from mutual funds for the privilege of being placed on the menu of investment options Fidelity made available to 401(k) plans that contract with it to receive certain investment opportunities and services. The district court granted Fidelity's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the district court properly dismissed the complaint. View "Wong v. FMR LLC" on Justia Law