Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

In 1982, Matthews was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. His conviction and sentence have been affirmed on direct appeal and in post-conviction proceedings, including in federal court. Having exhausted his judicial remedies, Matthews intends to petition the Governor of Kentucky for clemency under section 77 of the Kentucky Constitution, based on mitigating factors related to his neuropsychological health. The district court denied his request for funding under 18 U.S.C. 3599 to pay for a neuropsychological evaluation to support this argument, but apparently relied on an incorrect rule that section 3599 funding is available only for use in federal proceedings and did not otherwise explain its reasons for denying the request. The Sixth CIrcuit vacated and remanded, noting evidence that in the decades since the 1982 evaluation was conducted, the Bender Gestalt Test administered to Matthews has become “very outdated, rarely used today, and [is] not helpful to gain a full and reliable understanding of the extent of Matthews’ neuropsychological deficits and brain damage.” View "Matthews v. White" on Justia Law

Cincinnati officers, assigned to provide security outside the Black Family Reunion at Sawyer Point, were informed that young African American males were throwing guns over the fence to individuals who were inside. After Cyranek and other officers approached, those individuals ran toward downtown. The officers were then told to provide extra security at Government Square and Fountain Square. Cyranek saw 16-year-old Mullins walking from Fountain Square and recognized two individuals with Mullins from Sawyer Point. Cyranek observed Mullins holding and trying to conceal his right side, which led Cyranek to suspect that Mullins possessed a weapon. Cyranek followed him, but did not alert other officers or radio in his concerns. During a confrontation that lasted two minutes, Cyranek held Mullins to the ground, Mullins brandished a gun and gained enough freedom from Cyranek’s grip to throw his weapon 10-15 feet behind Cyranek. As Mullins threw his gun, Cyranek rose from his crouched position and fired twice. Video footage shows that, at most, five seconds elapsed between when Mullins threw his firearm and when Cyranek fired his final shot. Cyranek retrieved Mullins’s gun and placed it near Mullins’s feet. Mullins was pronounced dead at a hospital. In a suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment based on qualified immunity, calling the shooting a “tragedy,” but finding Cyranek’s split-second decision to use deadly force “not objectively unreasonable.” View "Mullins v. Cyranek" on Justia Law

Butler, age 25, arrived at Hopkins County Detention Center to serve a misdemeanor sentence. A tower operator saw Butler put something in his mouth and swallow, and relayed her observation to deputies, who started booking procedures. Butler vomited twice. Deputies noticed that Butler appeared to be under the influence and was sweating profusely. While answering questions, his demeanor deteriorated and he had difficulty standing. Butler stated that he had an MRSA infection, high blood pressure, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, and osteoporosis. He listed several prescribed medications and denied drug or alcohol addiction. The deputies did not want to admit Butler because of his condition. A licensed practical nurse examined Butler and instructed the deputies to admit Butler. As an LPN, she lacked the credentials to diagnose any illness, but was aware that untreated MRSA infection could lead to sepsis and death. Although staff placed Butler on suicide watch, there is no evidence that Butler was evaluated for suicidal ideation, nor any evidence that Butler received blood pressure medication while confined or that the nurses questioned why his blood pressure fell, absent medication. Butler died three days later from MRSA complications. The court rejected claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983b on summary judgment. The Sixth Circuit reversed, noting genuine issues of material fact and that the facility's medical contractor is not entitled to governmental immunity on the state-law claim. View "Shadrick v. Hopkins Cnty." on Justia Law

In the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, Customs and Border Patrol officers stopped Gyamfi while he was traveling to Detroit from Ghana. They found at least one kilogram of heroin packed in the inner lining of Gyamfi’s suitcase, allegedly without his knowledge. Gyamfi was charged with importing heroin, 21 U.S.C. 952(a), and possession with the intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). At trial, four CBP officers testified that Gyamfi appeared “nervous” while responding to questions about his travel plans and the contents of his suitcase. The jury found Gyamfi guilty, and the district court sentenced Gyamfi to 72 months in prison. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that the district court improperly admitted conclusory testimony as to Gyamfi’s mental state without laying a proper foundation. The officers merely described their “own sensory and experiential observations,” distinct from any broad conclusions or allegations directed to the merits of the case. View "United States v. Gyamfi" on Justia Law

In 1987, Abdur’Rahman was convicted of first-degree murder, assault with intent to commit first-degree murder, and armed robbery. He was sentenced to death. The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed. Abdur’Rahman unsuccessfully sought state post-conviction relief, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing and failure to turn over exculpatory evidence. Abdur’Rahman sought 28 U.S.C. 2254 relief. The Sixth Circuit vacated an order of habeas relief, concluding that Abdur’Rahman was not prejudiced by counsel’s performance. Abdur’Rahman filed a Rule 60(b) motion. The Sixth Circuit held that the prosecution did not violate Brady with respect to the codefendant’s pretrial statements and that trial counsel interviewed the police officer about, and could have obtained a separate report, concerning an incident following arrest. A cumulative error claim was defaulted as not raised in state court. In 2013, Abdur’Rahman sought to reopen claims in light of the Supreme Court holding, Martinez v. Ryan (2012). Abdur’Rahman specified: cumulative error affecting sentencing arising from prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance and an improper jury instruction regarding accomplice testimony and counsel’s failure to challenge the instruction. After the district court denied relief and issued its certificate of applicability, Abdur’Rahman moved for remand in light of intervening Sixth Circuit decisions. The Sixth Circuit affirmed and denied remand.As a change in decisional law, Marinez did not constitute an extraordinary circumstance meriting Rule 60(b)(6) relief. None of the claims involve substantial claims of ineffective assistance that were procedurally defaulted by inadequate post-conviction counsel. View "Abdur'Rahman v. Carpenter" on Justia Law

Seventeen days into his parole for a state drug conviction, James was caught selling drugs while carrying a pistol. Michigan revoked his parole, returning him to prison for five more years. The federal government indicted him for carrying a firearm while drug trafficking, which has a mandatory minimum five-year prison term and potentially a life sentence. Months later, James was transferred to federal custody. A federal court imposed a below-guidelines 15-year sentence, concurrent to James’ pre-existing state sentence; James would serve the beginning of his federal sentence in state prison. The court stated that he would receive “credit” for time “in custody of the federal marshal.” Later, the federal Bureau of Prisons told James that he would not receive credit for presentence time in federal custody because it, not the court, calculates presentence credit, and awarding James such credit would “double credit” him since Michigan had given him state credit for the same time. On James’s motion, the court added to the original judgment that James “shall get credit for time served beginning July 20, 2006, to January 4, 2007.” Worried that the amended judgment failed to “credit” his time in state prison after January 4, 2007, he appealed. The Sixth Circuit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, finding that James had no injury. View "United States v. James" on Justia Law

Moon and a co-conspirator acquired credit card numbers issued to third parties and used the information to create counterfeit credit cards and gift cards, which they used to purchase merchandise. Moon pled guilty to wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. 343 and 1349; the government agreed to move for dismissal of access device fraud and aggravated identity theft counts at sentencing. Moon also waived his right to appeal his conviction and a sentence “within the applicable guideline range, along with the manner in which the sentence was determined on the grounds set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3742 or any other grounds.” The district court sentenced Moon to 96 months’ imprisonment followed by for years supervised release and ordered restitution of $80,320.61. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, finding the sentence reasonable even if Moon had not waived his right to appeal. The court rejected an argument that the calculation of intended loss by assuming a $500 minimum loss for each stolen number overstated the severity of the offense and that that the district court should have calculated loss by including only actual losses from the usable card numbers. View "United States v. Moon" on Justia Law

Mateen pled guilty to possession of child pornography, 18 U.S.C. 2252. A few years earlier, Mateen had pled guilty to gross sexual imposition, Ohio Code 2907.05, which prohibits sexual contact that is non-consensual by virtue of force or threats of force; administration of drugs or other intoxicants; a victim less than 13 years old; or a victim substantially impaired in his ability to resist or consent. A violation of section 2252(a)(4) carries a maximum sentence of 10 years for first-time violators, but the statute includes a sentencing enhancement for offenders with certain qualifying convictions, including those “under the laws of any State relating to aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward.” Such a person “shall be . . . imprisoned for not less than 10 years nor more than 20 years.” At sentencing, the district court found that Mateen’s Ohio conviction “categorically” qualified for enhancement, defining “abuse” as “misuse . . . to use or treat so as to injure, hurt, or damage . . . to commit indecent assault on” and “sexual” as “intent to seek sexual or libidinal gratification,” and sentenced Mateen to 130 months’ imprisonment. The Sixth Circuit affirmed. View "United States v. Mateen" on Justia Law

Christian was part of a truck theft ring, working with Dubose, Davis, and Lanton. The theft ring first struck in May 2011. In August 2011 and June 2012, they stole three semis containing tires. A sting operation caught Davis selling tires. Davis unwittingly led police to a storage unit, rented by Christian’s girlfriend, where police observed the others loading stolen tires into Lanton’s car and arrested them. At the time, Christian had an unrelated state prosecution, on which he was represented by the same attorney who then represented Lanton. Lanton’s girlfriend and the attorney convinced Christian to sign an affidavit affirming that “Lanton had no knowledge about the heist,” a statement Christian knew was not true. Christian pled guilty. Christian’s PSR recommended: a 14-level specific offense characteristic based on the amount of loss ; a two-level upward adjustment for managerial role; and a three-level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility. He had a lengthy criminal history, resulting in a guideline range at 63–78 months of imprisonment. After learning of the false affidavit, the government declined to seek a substantial-assistance departure. On Halloween 2013, Christian knowingly drove a stolen truck. After that arrest, Christian’s attorney abandoned objections to the amount-of-loss calculation. The court overruled Christian’s objection to the managerial-role adjustment, sentencing him to 105 months. The Sixth Circuit vacated, finding the adjustment for a managerial role to be in error. View "United States v. Christian" on Justia Law

Coleman was convicted of armed robbery, as a felon-in-possession of a firearm, and of possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony and was sentenced to 22-32 years in prison. Coleman filed an unsuccessful pro se motion for a new trial. His direct appeal was unsuccessful. Coleman then moved for relief from judgment, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel because his appellate attorney failed to argue that he was allowed to proceed without counsel on his motion for a new trial. The state trial judge denied Coleman’s motion, noting that he had warned Coleman against proceeding without counsel, albeit at the end of the hearing rather than the outset. The Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal. The district court denied his federal habeas petition on the merits. The Sixth Circuit granted review, then vacated the COA as improvidently granted, The Supreme Court has never held that a hearing on a motion for a new trial is a critical stage of a criminal proceeding, so there is no “clearly established Federal law” creating a right to counsel at a hearing on a motion for a new trial and no basis on which Coleman’s appellate attorney could have argued before the Michigan Court of Appeals that a violation of the Sixth Amendment had occurred. View "Coleman v. Bergh" on Justia Law