17 results for 'judge:"Brasher"'.
J. Brasher remands defendant's appeal of his 20-year conspiracy and wire fraud sentence back to the 11th Circuit to consider whether the sentence is substantively unreasonable and whether the district court committed procedural errors in arriving at the sentence. The sentence was handed down after defendant received a life sentence for committing murder while on probation. The 11th Circuit overrules its previous precedent of vacating any sentence imposed by a district court without an explanation. The district court did not commit a plain error when it sentenced defendant and its failure to explain its reasoning for the sentence did not affect defendant's substantial rights. The district court's reasoning was obvious from the record.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 22-10742, Categories: Sentencing
J. Brasher finds that the district court improperly ruled in favor of the detective in a civil rights and malicious prosecution action brought by a citizen arrested by a detective for the murders of the man’s mother and stepfather. The individual spent a year in jail until the charges were dropped and another person was charged with the offenses. The detective omitted the full timeline of events from the arrest warrant affidavit, including the fact that the mother and stepfather were not killed until at least seven hours after the individual was last inside the house. A corrected version of the affidavit would not have established arguable probable cause for the individual’s arrest. A reasonable jury could find that the detective intentionally or recklessly left information out of the affidavit that exonerated the individual. Reversed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 22-13258, Categories: Civil Rights, Malicious Prosecution
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly admitted evidence of a police investigator's testimony and correctly convicted defendant of RICO conspiracy, attempted murder and other offenses. The investigator's statement at a preliminary hearing recounted a witness's statements implicating defendant in a crime. The witness was later murdered by other gang members who attended the hearing. The testimony was not hearsay because it was offered to establish the effect it had on the listeners at the hearing and to show that defendant and fellow gang members had a motive to kill the witness for cooperating with police. The district court correctly found that the probative value of the testimony was not outweighed by any unfair prejudice to defendant. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 22-13068, Categories: Confrontation, Conspiracy, Racketeering
J. Brasher finds that the district court improperly dismissed an action brought by three individuals and a gun advocacy group challenging the constitutionality of a Georgia law barring anyone under the age of 21 from obtaining a license to carry firearms. The district court correctly found that the individuals lack standing to sue the public safety commissioner but incorrectly found they lacked standing to sue three county probate judges. The individuals showed that they faced an injury due to the statute. The individuals also showed that their injury is traceable to the probate judges and redressable by an order against them because probate judges are responsible for issuing the licenses. Probate judges perform a ministerial rather than judicial function when processing weapons carry licenses. Reversed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 22-13444, Categories: Constitution, Firearms
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly convicted defendant of impeding law enforcement during a civil disorder. Defendant's charge arose after she smashed the window of a police car that was blocking protesters from walking onto the interstate during a 2020 Alabama protest against police brutality in the wake of George Floyd's death. The district court correctly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment on the basis that the statute underlying her offense is unconstitutional. The jurisdictional element of the statute requiring that the civil disorder obstruct commerce is enough to limit the law's scope to constitutional applications. The criminalized act in the statute is sufficiently connected to interstate commerce. Defendant's actions required commercial vehicles to be rerouted as they transported hazardous materials. The statute does not violate the First Amendment. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 21-13136, Categories: Obstruction, Civil Rights
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. Brasher finds that the district court properly denied defendant's petition for habeas relief from his death sentence for murder. Defendant's trial counsel was not deficient for failing to adequately impeach an eyewitness with evidence of his probationary status and probation violation warrants which were pending at the time of the trial. Defendant's counsel was also not ineffective for failing to call a detective to testify that the eyewitness said he could not swear to his identification of defendant during a photo lineup. Defendant's counsel challenged the strength of the eyewitness's identification during cross-examination in other ways. Other ineffective assistance claims raised by defendant are barred by the statute of limitations because they do not relate back to the initial, timely filed habeas petition. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 22-13616, Categories: Habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Murder
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress evidence found in his iCloud account that led to a charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court correctly found that although the warrant was invalid for lacking sufficient particularity, the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied. The warrant affidavit provided links between defendant's phone and the crime. The absence of probable cause in the affidavit was not so obvious that an officer could not reasonably rely on the warrant. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: 21-13092, Categories: Firearms, Search
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the government in an action brought by the individual challenging fees assessed against him by the IRS for failure to file tax returns and seeking a refund of the penalties. The individual's reliance on his CPA to e-file his returns does not constitute reasonable cause for failure to file the returns on time. The bright line rule established by the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Boyle applies. The individual had a duty to supervise the CPA's tax preparation and to ensure that his tax returns were submitted. E-filing did not alter or affect his obligation to file the returns. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: October 24, 2023, Case #: 22-10793, Categories: Tax
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the city on the former employee's civil rights and disability discrimination action arising from the termination of her healthcare retirement benefits under the city's new benefits plan. A former employee who does not hold or desire to hold an employment position cannot sue under Title I of the ADA to remedy discrimination in the provision of post-employment fringe benefits. The employee cannot show that the city committed any discriminatory acts against her while she could still perform the essential functions of a job she still wanted to hold. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: 22-10002, Categories: Civil Rights, Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment Discrimination
J. Brasher finds that the district court improperly revoked defendant's probation and ordered his imprisonment based on a violation committed after his supervised release had lapsed but while he was a fugitive from justice. The district court incorrectly tolled defendant's period of supervised release based on his fugitive status for Florida law battery, which happened months after the scheduled expiration of defendant's supervised release term. However, the district court had jurisdiction to revoke defendant's supervision based on his earlier violations for not contacting his probation officer. The case is remanded for the district court to decide whether to revoke defendant's probation based on that violation alone. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: September 7, 2023, Case #: 22-13921, Categories: Probation
J. Brasher finds the district court improperly sentenced defendant to the mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years in prison following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant's prior Florida conviction for possessing a listed chemical with reasonable cause to believe it will be used to manufacture a controlled substance does not qualify as a serious drug offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Possessing a listed chemical with reasonable cause to believe it will be used to manufacture does not amount to manufacturing the drug. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: July 31, 2023, Case #: 21-12609, Categories: Drug Offender, Firearms, Sentencing
J. Brasher finds that the district court improperly denied the district attorney's and assistant district attorney's motion for summary judgment on a false arrest claim in a civil rights and defamation action brought by two attorneys who were arrested after refusing to turn over a client's phone, which was placed in an attorney's bag minutes before police executed a search warrant for child porn on the phone. The attorneys were later acquitted of obstructing governmental operations and refusal to permit an inspection. The DA, ADA and deputies are entitled to qualified immunity because they had arguable probable cause to arrest the attorneys. An officer could have reasonably believed that the attorneys intended to prevent police from examining the phone. However, the DA and ADA are not entitled to state-agent immunity from the defamation claim arising from public statements they made alleging that the attorneys engaged in unethical and criminal conduct. Reversed in part.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 21-13632, Categories: Civil Rights, Defamation
J. Brasher denies the immigrant's petition for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals finding that the immigrant's citizenship claim failed because his mother had not been naturalized before he turned 18 years old. The immigrant forfeited judicial review of his claim that he is a U.S. citizen when he withdrew his appeal to the board and asked to be deported. The immigrant's motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey is also denied.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: July 28, 2023, Case #: 21-13382, Categories: Immigration
J. Brasher finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the manufacturer of a fat-freezing CoolSculpting system in a fraud, negligence and product liability action brought by the individual who developed a medical condition which enlarges fat tissue after trying the cosmetic procedure. The district court correctly found that the manufacturer's warnings to doctors about the consequences of the condition known as paradoxical adipose hyperplasia were adequate. The individual failed to identify any defect in the design of CoolSculpting. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 21-12085, Categories: Negligence, Product Liability
[Consolidated.] J. Brasher finds that the tax court properly ruled in favor of the IRS and upheld deficiency notices indicating that the taxpayers were liable for millions in unpaid taxes due to their participation in an unlawful tax shelter. Partner-level determinations were necessary to adjust the taxpayers' affected items including losses they reported from the sales of stock and euros they received from the bogus partnership as a liquidating distribution and itemized deductions that depended on those losses. The IRS correctly applied deficiency procedures to adjust the items. Making the adjustments requires an individualized assessment of each taxpayer's circumstances, therefore requiring partner level determinations under the now-repealed Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: 22-10196, Categories: Tax
J. Brasher upholds the tax court's ruling in favor of the commissioner in an action brought by the couple challenging $267,000 in tax deficiencies in a dispute over a yacht and denies the couple's petition for review of the decision. The tax court correctly calculated the couple's tax liability. Provisions of the internal revenue code show that hobby losses under a section of the code are below-the-line miscellaneous itemized deductions. The section of the code did not allow the couple to deduct their expenses from operating the yacht because they could not meet the 2% threshold for miscellaneous itemized deductions.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Brasher, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 22-10707, Categories: Tax