58 results for 'cat:"Threats"'.
J. Nichols finds that the trial court properly sentenced defendant for sexually abusing minor girls and adult women on Snapchat by blackmailing them into sending him sexually explicit photographs and videos of themselves, and threatening to post nude photos of the victims online or kill them if they did not comply with his demands. There is no basis to conclude that the trial court’s sentencing defendant to 184.5 to 369 years in prison was unreasonable. Affirmed.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Nichols, Filed On: December 5, 2023, Case #: J-S36021-23, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Sex Offender, threats
J. Streeter finds that the trial court properly considered aggravating factors when sentencing defendant for criminal threats. Though not admitted by defendant or found true by a jury, his prior convictions were in the certified record, so the heightened proof standard for aggravating factors did not apply. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Streeter, Filed On: November 29, 2023, Case #: A165613, Categories: Probation, threats, Dui
J. Joyce finds the trial court erred by entering a stalking protective order (SPO) against defendant, prohibiting him from contacting his neighbor. The “record does not contain evidence that respondent—in asking petitioner what she was doing, whether she wanted to go to jail, and threatening to break her band equipment—made any unequivocal threat of imminent and serious personal violence that he was likely to act upon.” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Joyce, Filed On: November 22, 2023, Case #: A180320, Categories: threats
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Pipkin finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to withdraw her guilty plea to aggravated assault and making a terroristic threat. The trial court correctly accepted defendant's Alford plea to the terroristic threat charge. The record shows that defendant understood her rights and the consequences of the plea. The trial court also made sure defendant knew that she was waiving her right to confront her accusers by pleading guilty. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Pipkin, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: A23A1174, Categories: Assault, threats, Plea
[Consolidated.] J. Menetrez finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for threatening statements made to judges. Because a judge is not an “executive officer” within the meaning of certain penal code, defendant is not liable under that provision as a matter of law. “Executive officer” unambiguously refers to an officer of the executive branch, of which judges are not a part. Reversed and remanded.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Menetrez, Filed On: October 25, 2023, Case #: E079389, Categories: Judiciary, threats, Due Process
J. Malone finds a lower court properly convicted a defendant on two felony crimes and two misdemeanors. The defendant argued that the lower court erred in calculating his criminal history score. However, the government presented sufficient evidence in court that a prior conviction for criminal threat was based on conduct that was intentional. Affirmed.
Court: Kansas Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Malone, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 125,269, Categories: Evidence, threats
J. St. Eve finds that the lower court properly ordered the defendant to be medicated as her delusions led her to believe that three current and former presidents sexually assaulted her, leading her to threaten to kill them, and she is currently unable to assist in her own defense. However, the court must provide a dosage range based on an expert's recommendation to provide a limit to the medical staff's discretion. Affirmed in part.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: St. Eve, Filed On: October 19, 2023, Case #: 23-1739, Categories: threats, Commitment
J. Hutchinson finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of threatening a public official for sending threatening electronic messages to two probation officers through a jail kiosk system. Probation officers are public officials under the definition of the crime because their office is established by statute and the discharge a public duty. Affirmed.
Court: Illinois Appellate Court, Judge: Hutchinson, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 220288, Categories: threats
J. Walker finds the lower court properly convicted and sentenced defendant for threatening to assault and murder prominent elected officials after the 2020 presidential election. In a video posted to the platform BitChute, defendant urged viewers to "slaughter" members of the U.S. Congress, which was a “true threat . . . to murder.” The evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and the jury was given proper instructions. Affirmed.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Walker, Filed On: September 20, 2023, Case #: 21-3020, Categories: Sentencing, threats, Jury Instructions
J. Markle finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of making terroristic threats and correctly denied his motion for a new trial. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's conviction, including evidence that defendant threatened to stab his brother. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Markle, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: A23A0851, Categories: threats
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court properly convicted defendant of tampering with a witness. Defendant threatened to kill his girlfriend if she cooperated with police to perform a controlled drug buy from a dealer who once sold her fentanyl-laced heroin which killed her previous boyfriend. The district court correctly denied defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal. The government presented sufficient evidence showing defendant's intent to influence official proceedings related to the police investigation by threatening his girlfriend after she told him she was talking to a federal prosecutor about being a witness. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 21-11342, Categories: threats, Witnesses
J. Newsom finds that the district court properly convicted defendant of mailing a threatening communication and threatening a federal official. Defendant wrote in an objection to a federal magistrate judge's recommendation in a separate case that he was "threatening [the judge] with death and bodily harm." The objection also said defendant was "threatening [the judge] who is a woman of color with death" and included a link to a YouTube video of defendant holding a Black preacher's hand as a gospel hymn played. The district court correctly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment. Although defendant was hospitalized for longer than the four months permitted by the statute, the violation does not warrant dismissal of the indictment. Any error committed by the district court in commenting on the religious language and imagery in the hymn when sentencing defendant to 60 months in prison was harmless. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Newsom, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 22-10509, Categories: Sentencing, threats
J. Higginbotham finds the trial court properly convicted defendant by plea agreement for possession of a firearm after a felony conviction, sentencing him to 189 months in prison after applying an Armed Career Criminal Act enhancement. A cited case that defendant says undermines another case’s conclusion that “robbery-by-threat” constitutes a violent felony does not reach the crime at issue, as it addresses offenses criminalizing attempted robberies without a use or threat of force. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Higginbotham, Filed On: August 15, 2023, Case #: 22-10544, Categories: Firearms, Robbery, threats
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the district court improperly granted the government’s motion to involuntarily medicate defendant, who is on trial for threatening to assault a federal judge, is not competent to stand trial and is forbidden from using psychiatric medication by his religion. Though the government has shown it has a compelling interest in administering the medication, the court must consider in the first instance whether the Religion Freedom Restoration Act or any other religious-freedom protection applies. Vacated and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 23-30030, Categories: Competence, threats, Civil Rights
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that an inmate was properly found guilty of violating prison rules by making threats and extorting another inmate to receive drugs through the mail because the confidential source provided sufficient evidence to allow an independent assessment of reliability and credibility to counter exculpatory testimony presented by the inmate and his witnesses. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 535821, Categories: threats, Extortion, Prisoners' Rights
J. Riley finds that defendants were properly convicted of intimidation based on evidence indicating defendants threatened the victim with excommunication from the church unless their names were removed a protective order. Meanwhile, defendants waived religious freedom claims by failing to raise such at trial. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Riley, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 22A-CR-2154, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Intent, threats
J. Badding finds that defendant was properly sentenced for threat of terrorism based on online posts laying out plans to drive by schools with a loaded automatic rifle, as the lower court sufficiently explained the reasons for imposing a prison sentence. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Badding, Filed On: July 20, 2023, Case #: 22-1774, Categories: Sentencing, threats, Terrorism
J. McKinnon finds that the trial court was within its discretion during defendant's DUI and threats trial to admit his sex offender status under the transaction rule. The statement a deputy made about his status was inextricably intertwined with defendant's statements during his arrest that he knew where the deputy, his wife and child lived and went to church. However, pretrial supervision costs were improperly imposed without considering defendant's ability to pay. Affirmed in part.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: McKinnon, Filed On: July 11, 2023, Case #: DA 21-0405, Categories: Evidence, threats, Dui
J. Delaney finds witness testimony during defendant's trial on menacing and firearms charges regarding the sequence of events that led to his arrest allowed the jury to reasonably conclude he had a loaded gun in his truck. Neighbors testified they either heard or saw him "squeal" out of his driveway immediately before crashing the truck and firing several shots toward the victim. Meanwhile, the prosecution's statement during closing arguments about the definition of a loaded gun, although imprecise, was an isolated statement and did not prejudice the jury against defendant. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Delaney, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2188, Categories: Evidence, Firearms, threats
J. Kagan finds that the court of appeals improperly upheld defendant's conviction for making threatening communications to a local musician because the state failed to prove defendant was aware his social media communications with the singer were threatening in nature. Reversed.
Court: US Supreme Court, Judge: Kagan, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 22-138, Categories: Constitution, threats, Civil Rights
Per curiam, the appeals court finds the child's habeas corpus petition challenging the extension of his secure detention by the state while facing charges connected to his threat on social media to carry out a school shooting must be denied. The available evidence supports the state's requested 21-day extension to the child's secure detention, including based on the need to protect public safety in light of the fact that the firearm the child brandished in a picture on social media has not been located and he may still have access to it.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: 23-2003, Categories: Firearms, Habeas, threats
J. Sutton finds the lower court properly placed the burden of proof on defendant to prove his release would not create a substantial risk of harm to the public. The relevant statute and case law requires the presumption a defendant who pleaded guilty by reason of insanity is dangerous to society if they are not properly rehabilitated. Regardless, the trial court properly revoked defendant's probation because his behavior, including a failure to abide by his treatment regimen and threats of violence against family members, made him a threat to those around him and the public at large. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Sutton, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 22-5002, Categories: Evidence, Probation, threats