26 results for 'cat:"Assault" AND cat:"Due Process"'.
J. Soto finds a lower court did not err in revoking defendant’s community supervision and sentencing him to 10 years in prison after he pleaded no contest to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and then, by his own admission, failed to comply with probation requirements. Defendant argued the 10-year sentence was inappropriate since it was more than both the prosecutors and the probation office had sought. He also highlighted recent challenges in his life, including his wife’s recent death and a “period of homelessness.” Despite defendant’s “very unfortunate situation,” courts can “impose any punishment within the relevant statutory range once it revokes community supervision,” as is the case here. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: May 21, 2024, Case #: 08-23-00316-CR, Categories: Probation, assault, due Process
J. Winokur finds that the circuit court properly denied defendant a writ of mandamus seeking another parole interview and consideration of a reduced sentence for aggravated assault because the commission has discretion to decide when to hold parole interviews, and defendant did not have a legal right to an interview. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Winokur, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: 1D2023-0798, Categories: Parole, assault, due Process
J. Copperthite denies the board’s motion to dismiss this sex discrimination lawsuit brought by a male student who was accused of sexual misconduct by a female student. The male student claims he was falsely accused and is a victim of gender discrimination because the university forced him to undergo an allegedly bias-ridden investigation process before expelling him. His pleadings allow a plausible inference of discrimination and he properly alleges the board deprived him of his due process rights. The student seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to require the board to reverse the hearing’s outcome, restore his reputation, expunge and seal the disciplinary and dismissal records, destroy the female student’s complaint and return him to good standing, but the court does not rule on this yet.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Copperthite, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv3100, NOS: Education - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, due Process, assault
J. Aarons finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant based on his guilty plea to attempted assault for striking a neighbor in the head with a hammer. While the time between the crime and indictment had been protracted, due process was not violated because the neighbor hesitated in pressing charges until he was interviewed in connection with the suspicious death of defendant's wife, with whom the neighbor had a brief extramarital affair. An enhanced sentence was properly imposed since defendant failed to adhere to conditions requiring honest answers to presentence report questions. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Aarons, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: CR-22-2067, Categories: Sentencing, assault, due Process
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. Neeley finds the trial court properly revoked defendant's community supervision for his guilty plea conviction for assaulting a member of his household by impeding breathing or circulation. Defendant's supervision was properly revoked for his failure to submit to a urinalysis and for committing another assault against a different victim. If defendant's right to confront the alleged victim during the revocation hearing was violated, any error regarding a violation to which he pleaded “not true” did not contribute to his conviction because he pleaded “true” to other offenses. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Neeley , Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00199-CR, Categories: Probation, assault, due Process
J. Higginson finds the district court properly convicted defendant for assault with a dangerous weapon resulting in serious bodily injury. The shooting occurred on the Choctaw reservation after a long night of drinking, when an argument ensued over where and how to get more alcohol, and it is undisputed defendant shot the victim four times. All evidence supports the conviction, and no error is found in the court's denial of defendant's pretrial motion to recuse the lead prosecutor for having previously represented him while employed as a public defender in the tribal court. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Higginson, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 23-60040, Categories: assault, Weapons, due Process
J. Leonard finds the lower court properly dismissed defendant’s assault charges without prejudice. The amended charges were initially defective for lacking a definition of substantial bodily injury as to the victim. The charges should not have been dismissed with prejudice, though, despite not having held a preliminary hearing as he was already charged by information before the hearing date was set. Further, the Supreme Court of Hawaii “has upheld and ordered dismissals of numerous other cases without prejudice as the remedy for an insufficient charge.” Affirmed.
Court: Hawai'i Court Of Appeals, Judge: Leonard, Filed On: January 26, 2024, Case #: CAAP-23-105, Categories: assault, due Process
J. Marion finds a lower court ruled correctly in convicting defendant of assault. Defendant argued that a lower court erred in admitting testimony about another person “brandishing a gun” during the incident, which defendant argued was “unfairly prejudicial and inflammatory” and not relevant to the case, but defendant did not adequately preserve this issue for review by failing to sufficiently object to this evidence at trial. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Marion, Filed On: November 28, 2023, Case #: 08-23-00118-CR, Categories: Evidence, assault, due Process
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit declines to remove the Board of Immigration Appeals’ affirmation of an immigration judge’s order to remove a Tanzanian citizen for committing domestic assault and battery by strangulation. The petitioner was properly found removable because he was convicted for a violent offense. He did not challenge the judge’s conclusion that he failed to meet the deadline to apply for asylum on appeal to the board, and that challenge is unexhausted. Immigration judges are not required to provide advance notice of necessary corroborating evidence or to grant a continuance to obtain the evidence.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: November 6, 2023, Case #: 22-60573, Categories: Immigration, assault, due Process
J. Hoyle finds the trial court properly convicted and sentenced defendant for aggravated kidnapping and assault causing severe bodily injury. Defendant filed a motion alleging entitlement to a new trial because the “Arresting/Investigating Department” possessed additional Brady evidence that was not disclosed, and because he had a “meritorious defense as to the range of punishment.” A guiding case and applicable threshold test support the 20-year sentence. Defendant has established no grounds for relief and is not entitled to a hearing on his motion for new trial. There is no abuse of discretion. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Hoyle, Filed On: October 6, 2023, Case #: 12-23-00107-CR, Categories: assault, Kidnapping, due Process
J. Miller vacates defendant's convictions on charges of aggravated rape and video voyeurism and grants a new trial due to the trial court's erroneous exclusion and admittance of certain evidence. The case stems from the alleged rape of a victim allegedly perpetrated by defendant and the former Livingston Parish Sheriff's Deputy Dennis Perkins, who at the time was married to the victim. The victim claims she would have never consented to a threesome involving defendant, but there was evidence contradicting this where the victim "admitted to having group sex on video on more than one occasion." Vacated.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: October 5, 2023, Case #: 2022KA1110, Categories: Evidence, assault, due Process
J. Milkey affirms the denial of a sex offender’s motion to vacate his level three sex offender classification and grant him a new hearing based on allegedly having received ineffective counsel. Too much time has passed since he was classified and received counsel for him to make this appeal, when he could instead apply for reclassification based on changed circumstances.
Court: Massachusetts Court Of Appeals, Judge: Milkey, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 22-P-66, Categories: Administrative Law, due Process, assault
Per curiam, the appellate court denies defendant a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to hold a hearing on his application for habeas corpus and dismissal of prosecution with prejudice from his indictment for allegedly assaulting a public servant while incarcerated for another offense. Defendant says he was indicted after filing the application, that he has not completed serving his sentence, and that the allegation shows that he is not entitled to be released on bail. He says he could be reindicted if the indictment were dismissed. Since an indictment has been returned, the court declines to compel the trial court to rule on an application raising a speedy-indictment complaint as moot. The application for relief seeks to compel a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. Defendant fails to demonstrate he is entitled to mandamus relief.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: 09-23-00268-CR, Categories: Habeas, assault, due Process
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the district court improperly dismissed a lawsuit alleging a now-deceased teacher sexually assaulted a summer camp attendee when he was 10 or 11 in 1968 or 1969. Though the court granted the school’s motion for dismissal on grounds that the injured party’s cited “Revival Provision” violated the Louisiana Constitution’s due process clause, in fact, the Louisiana Supreme Court recently vacated an identical decision, holding that in enacting the provision the legislature “did not clearly express an intent to revive prescribed sexual abuse claims occurring prior to 1993.” The provision revives only certain actions brought up to 10 years after the minor attained the age of majority and is silent as to claims that would have already been prescribed at the time of its enactment. The Revival Provision is inapplicable and the case should be dismissed for that reason. On remand the court may consider whether the complaint should be dismissed with leave to amend. Vacated and remanded.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 22-30407, Categories: Constitution, due Process, assault
J. Donovan reverses summary judgment against a former student who sued the high school she attended as a minor, where she was sexually assaulted by a teacher. While her complaint fell outside the statute of limitations, she had only learned recently that the school had hired the teacher who assaulted her while fully aware that the teacher had been convicted of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor female student in Maine. Reversed and remanded.
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court, Judge: Donovan, Filed On: August 10, 2023, Case #: 2022-0259, Categories: Education, due Process, assault
[Modified.] J. Codrington modifies a previously published opinion and denies a petition for rehearing with no change in judgment. The trial court was within its discretion to deny the state a continuance to extend the 60-day deadline to try defendant's felony case. A shortage of judges, a chronic backlog and operational delays caused by Covid-19 combined to require the dismissal of charges for assault with a deadly weapon. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Codrington, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: E080076, Categories: Judiciary, assault, due Process
J. Miller finds that the trial court improperly entered judgment against the massage customers who allege that they were sexually assaulted by the massage therapists. Demurrers were sustained without leave to amend on the ground that the applicable statutes of limitations barred the claims. An amendment to the code of civil procedure that went into effect on the heels of the appellate briefing revives, possibly, all the claims. Those alleging assault must have opportunity to amend their complaints. The therapists who have been accused must also have the opportunity to make further arguments as to the effect of the revival statute on each of the causes of action. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Miller , Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: A163543, Categories: due Process, assault
J. Medina finds a lower court ruled correctly in determining defendant was “incompetent to proceed to trial but not dangerous under the New Mexico Mental Illness Code” following her arrest for allegedly assaulting a police officer. Prosecutors argued the lower court had improperly excluded evidence of prior criminal complaints from a “dangerousness hearing” and that such hearings should be excluded from some rules of evidence just like with pre-trial hearings, but this argument is “unpersuasive” because there is no specific exemption for these dangerousness hearings, unlike other types of hearings. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Medina, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-40466, Categories: Evidence, assault, due Process
J. Codrington finds that the trial court was within its discretion to deny the state a continuance to extend the 60-day deadline to try defendant's felony case. A shortage of judges, a chronic backlog and operational delays caused by Covid-19 combined to require the dismissal of charges for assault with a deadly weapon. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Codrington, Filed On: July 11, 2023, Case #: E080076, Categories: Judiciary, assault, due Process
J. Tow finds that the trial court violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial by removing all public, including members of her family, from the courtroom where she was tried for assault. The removal to an auxiliary courtroom where they watched her trial over video was nontrivial and the trial court did not support the order with required findings. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tow, Filed On: June 8, 2023, Case #: 21CA1645, Categories: assault, due Process
J. McDonald finds that although defendant was acquitted of assault, the trial court properly used evidence supporting the charge in its sentencing calculations for other convictions. Supreme Court precedent establishes such conduct, so long as it is supported by a preponderance of the evidence, can be used during sentencing. Additionally, the trial court heard all the evidence presented at trial, could judge the reliability of all witnesses, and did not use the conduct from the assault charge to enhance defendant's sentence or extend it beyond the required guidelines. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: McDonald, Filed On: June 6, 2023, Case #: SC20734, Categories: Sentencing, assault, due Process
Per curiam, the Wisconsin Supreme Court finds the court of appeals incorrectly upheld the circuit court's order calling for involuntary medication to restore defendant's competency. Because the state concedes it did not meet its burden under U.S. Supreme Court precedent controlling the narrow circumstances in which a lower court can order involuntary medication to make a defendant competent for trial, the court of appeals' ruling is overturned, and the case is remanded. Reversed.
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: June 2, 2023, Case #: 2020AP819-CR, Categories: Competence, assault, due Process