Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

This collection has many hidden limitations. To find out what you're really searching, see the disclaimer .

Your query child and custody returned 1789 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

	OPINION/ORDER That inquiry will inform our determination as to whether Bagot is correct that Respondents deported him to Guyana illegally. Having been in his father's legal custody at the time the father was naturalized. He is derivatively a United States citizen. Who was in Guyana at the time and had never been to the United States. The District Court was confronted. As we are here. With the difficult question of how to define
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Mary Doe1 challenges the State of California's jurisdiction Pseudonyms are used to identify the mother. Who was domiciled on the Elem Indian Colony reservation at the time she was removed from Mary Doe's custody by the Lake County Department of Social Services. Which was passed in 1978 to ensure the tribes a role in adjudicating child custody proceedings involving Indian children. Codified at 25 U.S.C. зз 1901 1963.2 ICWA provides that tribes will have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceedings involving Indian children domiciled or residing on the reservation
	OPINION/ORDER Will affirm the District Court's judgment. The implementing statute is the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (
	OPINION/ORDER We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1292. Who was thirteen years old at the time of the events in dispute. Although Hansen was the sole legal guardian. The custody order included a visitation schedule which governed in the event that Brittain and Hansen were unable to agree on one of their own. Two paragraphs of that order are central to this appeal: 11. The last week during each period the minor is off track from school. Or if minor is not in a yearround program. Mother is to notify Father prior to May 15 of each year of the three weeks during summer vacation she intends to have the minor. Mother shall have the minor the last full week of each of the months of June. Father shall have the right to a three or four week vacation each year in which he may remove the minor from the state of California and during which time the Mother's visitation shall be suspended. Father will give Mother a one month written notice of the dates he intends to take his vacation. Matthew went outside and told his father that he would not be going with him because it was Brittain's week for visitation.
	OPINION/ORDER Caldeira were on brief for appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER Alito heard oral argument in this case but was elevated to the United States Supreme Court on January 31. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. з 46(d). I. The factual background of this case is troubling. We say this not only because of the ominous accusations of abuse that have been directed at Adan. Also because the record on appeal is woefully incomplete. We shall refer to her as
	OPINION/ORDER 1343 U.N.T.S. 49 (
	LOPS V. LOPS (5/7/1998, NO. 97-9381) Petitioner Initiates Divorce And Custody Proceedings In Germany Petitioner and Respondent Lops were married in Germany in June 1991. Petitioner initiated divorce and custody proceedings in the German family court for the district that was the marital and habitual residence of the parties. Judge Giwitz's letter further states that Respondent Lops dispelled these concerns by arguing that he was firmly rooted in Germany and had no further connection with the United States.
	LOPS V. LOPS (5/7/1998, NO. 97-9381) Petitioner Initiates Divorce And Custody Proceedings In Germany Petitioner and Respondent Lops were married in Germany in June 1991. Petitioner initiated divorce and custody proceedings in the German family court for the district that was the marital and habitual residence of the parties. Judge Giwitz's letter further states that Respondent Lops dispelled these concerns by arguing that he was firmly rooted in Germany and had no further connection with the United States.
	OPINION/ORDER We have before us a petition filed by one parent against the other under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Concluding that the United States was Evan's
	OPINION/ORDER Was on the brief for appellants District Attorney's Office and Michael N. P.C. were on the brief for appellant Carl Borgioli.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER We conclude that the district court should have promptly adjudicated Jeremiah's Hague Convention petition in accor 13310 HOLDER v. Does not now mean that he is barred from raising them in federal court by the preclusive effect of the state court judgment or that he has waived his rights under the Hague Convention. This dispositive requirement is not met because the issues in a suit under the Hague Convention case will not be resolved by a state court custody suit in which no Hague Convention claim is raised. We also vacate the district court's denial of Carla's motion for attorney's fees on the grounds that it is premature. BACKGROUND THE HAGUE CONVENTION AND ICARA The Hague Convention is a multilateral international treaty on parental kidnapping to which the United States and Germany are signatories. Article 12 therefore provides that when a child is removed from one signatory nation to another. Article 16 provides that
	96-2278 -- K.L. V. VALDEZ -- 08/12/1999 Sixteen mentally or developmentally disabled children who are or were in the custody of the state of New Mexico. Brought this action for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging that defendants have failed to provide protections and therapeutic services required by federal statutes and the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs sought to certify a class comprised of
	OPINION/ORDER BACKGROUND The Hanleys are the maternal grandparents and testamentary guardians of Roy's children н D.R. (born 1988). The Hanleys were helping support Margaret and the children because the couple was financially unstable. Is over 16. She is not subject to return under the Convention. 2 1 Margaret was diagnosed with cancer and wanted to return to Ireland. He did not pay any child support and continued to have financial difficulties. Margaret executed a will. Margaret died in November 2000 and her will was probated in August 2003.2 Roy and the children continued to live with the Hanleys from 2000 until July 29. There is much dispute over whether Roy was aware of the will and the appointment of the Hanleys as testamentary guardians therein. Roy admits he was shown a copy of the will in December of 2005. 3 2 refused to return the children. Arguing that the Hanleys did not have any
	OPINION/ORDER When she was eleven years old. Holding that there was no wrongful retention because Maria's habitual residence was the United States. Arguing that Maria is habitually resident in Finland. Although this is a close case. Maria acclimatized to the United States and that there was a degree of settled purpose from her perspective to remain in this country. We agree with the District Court's finding that Maria is a habitual resident of the United States and will affirm. I. Facts and Procedural History Maria was born on April 25. Were married at the time and remained so until 1997. Maria was unable to obtain a tourist visa for a visit to the United States due to the concerns of the United States Consulate in Finland about Maria's custody status. That Karkkainen
	OPINION/ORDER Facts No. 01 3928 Patrice and Jean Bouvagnet were married in New York City in 1988. Were born in 1995. Until she could earn enough seniority and good will to secure a transfer to Paris. Bouvagnet's application for French citizenship was based on her marriage to Patrice Bouvagnet. Bouvagnet's application for French citizenship was dismissed after she failed to appear for a mandatory meeting with French authorities. Bouvagnet was served with the divorce petition in March 2000 while visiting his children. Trial was set for June 2001. The Illinois proceedings are still pending. The district court took the view that it was required to abstain because three conditions existed: first. State proceedings that were judicial in nature were pending. Bouvagnet the opportunity to present 1 A French court dismissed the case because the Illinois proceedings were ongoing. The dismissal was overturned in October 2001 and the action recently reinstated. Having determined that it was required to abstain under Younger. All of the states and the federal government have enacted legislation to address the problem of child abduction a parent's taking a child from a jurisdiction that has awarded custody rights to the other parent in the hope that a court in another jurisdiction will be more sympa No. 01 3928 5 thetic to the abducting parent's plea for custody.
	OPINION/ORDER The caseworkers removed eleven year old John Doe Jr. from his fourth grade classroom and interviewed him about corporal punishment that he and other students may have received and certain family matters. Arguing that they were entitled to qualified immunity from the plaintiffs' suit. Although we conclude that some of the actions taken by the defendants during the course of the Bureau's investigation were unconstitutional. Agree with the district court that the caseworkers are entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiffs' suit. The district court's decision is. If the report is screened in. An intake supervisor will assign it an urgency level to determine how quickly an investigation must be initiated. After the file is received by a field office. Who is then required to contact the reporter(s) (of child abuse). If the alleged maltreater is a parent. It was given a 24 hour urgency designation and assigned to John Wichman. That they had advised her 2 When a child is enrolled at Greendale. Parents are given a copy of the school's
	MORROW V. WINSLOW Morrow claimed there was subject matter jurisdiction below pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1343(a)(3). (ICWA).(1) I .....Plaintiff Appellant Morrow is an
	OPINION/ORDER Second full paragraph the first sentence is deleted. Is replaced with the following: As Sheriff David Kelbie noted in his commentary to the Scottish Court of Sessions's opinion in Donofrio v. A parent
	OPINION/ORDER P.C. were on brief for appellant.
	OPINION/ORDER Was on brief. John exhibited serious behavioral and emotional problems stemming from past abuse problems that the appellant alleges were known to DCYF at the time of the placement. That chain was forged when the appellant left John with a friend for seven weeks to participate in the television show
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judges Murphy and McMillian were not present at oral arguments and participated in this decision utilizing the parties' briefs and a tape recording of the oral arguments. Because we find that the children's habitual residence was Israel at the time of their removal and that there is no grave risk of harm to the children if they are returned to Israel. Until their move to Israel in late July of 1999.3 Both Robert and Julie testified in the district court that the move to Israel was Julie's idea and that she was the one pushing for the family to make the move. Julie stated in the district court that she was torn about the move. Went ahead with it as a final effort to reconcile the couple's failing marriage.5 2 3 Sam was born on March 2. Jacob was born on July 5. Julie testified that she was
	OPINION/ORDER S.S. was sodomized by Griffis. Because we are considering a motion to dismiss. S.S. was taken into the Division's protective custody in January 1994. S.S. had been locked in her bedroom for periods of time by her parents and was sexually abused by an unknown person. Defendants Michelle McMullen and Sherry Jacoby are social workers in the Division and were assigned to S.S.'s case in February and May of 1994. While S.S. was in the Division's custody. We have avoided referring to her father by 2 name. Griffis was present during three of these visits: July 18. The defendants later learned that Griffis was a child molester and that he presented a danger to S.S. McMullen became aware of an anonymous child abuse hotline call stating that S.S.
	OPINION/ORDER Annes's decision was based on a four inch linear skull fracture that Rebekah's treating physician had reported to Child and Family Services four days earlier. The Division of Child and Family Services found that protective custody was no longer warranted and returned Rebekah to her family. The court also indicated that
	OPINION/ORDER This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for the return of a child to Australia under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The principal issue is whether the District Court correctly held the petitioner consented to the removal or retention of the child under article 13(a) of the Hague 2 Convention. We will reverse and remand. The factual background is straightforward. Baxter and Torin have since been living in the home of Mr. Baxter was born in Selbyville and has dual U.S. and Australian citizenship. 3 1 Before September 2003. Torin and his parents lived together as a family in Australia.2 Their lifestyle was itinerant. The Baxters' last home together was on Bathurst Island. Their stay there was short and troubled. The community was beset with problems. The couple eventually decided the environment was unsuitable for their child. The parties dispute whether the purpose of the trip to Delaware was to relocate definitively in the United States or to visit relatives for a time while giving the family an opportunity to plot a new course.
	OPINION/ORDER The case was remanded to the district court to consider whether Defendants' reliance on Utah Code Ann. 62A 4a 202.1 and 202.2 or the advice of counsel made their conduct nonetheless objectively reasonable and thus entitled them to qualified immunity. Defendants' conduct was not objectively reasonable. Was sweating profusely. Was wearing a parka in seventy degree weather. Roska stated that Rusty was suffering from kidney failure. Who assured her Rusty was not in kidney failure. Sneddon was told that Rusty's healthy appendix had been removed at Mrs. The dispute is irrelevant in this case. The issue we must decide is whether Defendants' actions were objectively reasonable in light of the information they possessed at the time of removal. Regardless of whether theinformation was accurate or not. MSBP is a disorder in which an individual. The prior DCFS investigation concluded that the allegations of MSBP were unsubstantiated. When Morrison informed the physicians she was investigating Mrs. Both stated something to the effect that it was about time someone discovered what was going on with Rusty.
	OPINION/ORDER Taveraz
	OHLANDER V. LARSON Was adopted by the signatory nations
	OPINION/ORDER If such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed[.] 2 Section 2251A(b)(2) provides. Who was then thirty eight years of age and living in New York City. Who was having trouble with her family and at school. Which was also Megan's fourteenth birthday. Was grounded. She was not allowed by her parents to leave her home or use the Internet or telephone. Buculei was nonetheless determined to see her again. Notwithstanding the red light that was illuminated on the front of the video camera. The camera was not working. Because she was still dizzy. Megan was back in bed at home before her father awoke at 6:00 a.m. Meeting Megan soon after she was dropped off by her school bus. Later that evening the authorities were called and Megan was interviewed. Buculei was then detained while a search warrant was obtained for his residence in New York. Buculei was thereafter indicted in the District of Maryland for five separate violations of federal law.
	OPINION/ORDER The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Petitioner appellant S.L.V.M. Is implemented in the United States by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA). The Hague Convention was adopted to protect children from the adverse effects of being wrongfully removed to or retained in a foreign country and to establish procedures for their return.
	OPINION/ORDER Miss Martin sued the defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. з 1983 after her children were removed from her home for one night in October 1997. Miss Martin is the mother of two minor children. Mary's Department is a Maryland state agency charged with investigating allegations of child abuse and neglect and authorized by the state to take temporary custody of a child if it believes that the child is in serious. Mary's Department was involved with Miss Martin's family. Justin was part of the School records showed that Justin missed 66 days of kindergarten and 71 days of first grade. They filed a petition in the circuit court seeking a finding that Justin was a
	OPINION/ORDER Claudia Librett (
	OPINION/ORDER This is an action to recover damages under 42 U.S.C. з 1983 for the violation of substantive due process rights. Although they had notice that her father was allowing her to have contact with the known pedophile who subsequently sodomized her on at least two occasions. The known pedophile himself called one of the defendants to complain that it was unfair to try to limit his contact with S.S. Would give rise to liability for a constitutional tort is DeShaney v. The Court emphasized that the constitutional right to be free from bodily harm is a right secured only against state actors. Not against private ones: The purpose of the fourteenth amendment
	POWELL V. GEORGIA DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Powell v. Was born on April 26. Odum called the Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="761"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/03/99-2287.htm">99-2287 -- CURRIER V. DORAN -- 03/01/2001<BR></A><BR> Regina Sentell are social workers for the Children. Defendant Melba Gonzales is a supervisor for CYF.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="761"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may97/96-8359.man.html">POWELL V. GEORGIA DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Powell v. Was born on April 26. Odum called the Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="759"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2215.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C.</SPAN> was on brief. Was on brief. We hold that (1) such a prosecution is consistent with the language and intent of the statute. (2) the district court did not have authority to impose such an order.<STRONG>I.</STRONG></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="759"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0692n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Gender discrimination.1 Plaintiff argues on appeal that the district court erred in finding that defendants were entitled to immunity from suit on the state law claims pursuant to Ohio Rev. Krantz and Wyman split up not long after Dakota was born. A petition for custody was brought in Juvenile Court. The caseworker assigned to Dakota's petition was defendant Keely Gray. Temporary custody was awarded to LCCS in early 1998. Wyman was awarded legal custody of Dakota. Krantz was granted visitation </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="757"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-1577_014.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Koch ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="757"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-1577_018.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We affirm. 1 This opinion was originally issued in typescript. 2 I. Koch ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="754"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992630.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 1 seeking the children's return on the ground that they were illegally abducted by Miller in violation of a valid Canadian custody order. A. The essential facts underlying this dispute are spelled out in the District Court Order. Miller is a citizen and resident of Canada. While Miller is a citizen and resident of the United States. The parties' Both the United States and Canada are signatories to the Hague Convention. 1 MILLER v. Was born in Canada in September 1990. Who was born in Canada in August 1995. They have since divorced. The children were habitually resident in Canada as of August 28. Miller filed her Hague Convention petition less than one year after the children were taken to the United States. The petition actually was filed on August 23. The court was correct. In finding that the action was commenced less than one year after the children's removal from Canada. 2 4 MILLER v. This case is complicated by a series of conflicting custody orders issued by courts in both New York State and Ontario. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="752"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19968359.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was born on April 26. Took the baby to the Because we are reviewing the district court's dismissal of Powell's complaint for failure to state a claim. Odum called the Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="752"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AF91D4AA46E8B18388256D7C0077D991/$file/0150616.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291 to decide whether the return of the child pursuant to civil proceedings under the Hague Convention forecloses criminal prosecution under the IPKCA. We agree with the district court and hold that prosecuting an individual under the IPKCA after a child is returned to the United States pursuant to Hague Convention proceedings </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="752"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19968359.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was born on April 26. On Because we are reviewing the district court's dismissal of Powell's complaint for failure to state a claim. Odum called the Richmond County Department of Family and Children Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="752"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/03-2054.htm">03-2054 -- ROBERTS V. HARTZ -- 09/01/2004<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="750"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTkyOTlfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-9299_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> J.) concluded that Eden was not habitually resident in Israel because Mrs. Who was part of this panel. The appeal is being decided by the remaining two members of the panel. Who are in agreement. Circuit Judge: This is a case of first impression in which we must interpret the phrase </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="748"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0364p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendant Appellant Brendan Allen Shaw ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="741"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb2001/992037.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is the second time we have been asked to r esolve issues stemming from divorce and custody proceedings involving Peter and Pamela Hughes. 308 n. 1 (3d Cir . 1974) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="741"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199906/96-7239b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were John M. With him on the brief were Wilma A. With him on the brief was Arthur B. Farris was on the brief for amicus curiae Home School Legal Defense Association. Holding that it violates the fundamental rights of minors and their parents and is unconstitutionally vague. Rehearing en banc was granted. Determining that juvenile crime and victimization in the District was a serious prob lem and growing worse unanimously adopted the Juvenile Curfew Act of 1995. The curfew contains eight </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="735"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-2237.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Few decisions by state officials are as wrenching as the decision to remove a child from a home based on suspicion of parental abuse. The competing constitutional interests are so powerful that courts have struggled to find adequate superlatives. The state's interest in shielding children from abuse is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="730"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1E8C4359706CBA1E88256DD4005BF628/$file/0216326.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Reasoning that her actions were part of the initiation and pursuit of child dependency proceedings for which social workers are entitled to absolute immunity. The court also concluded that there was no basis for Monell liability against the County. We agree with the district court that the Does' Monell claim against the County must fail because there was no evidence that Herrera was a final decisionmaker for the County. We also agree with the district court that Herrera is entitled to immunity for her actions. We disagree that she is entitled to absolute immunity across the board. We hold that Herrera's actions in allegedly failing to investigate adequately the allegations of abuse and neglect against George and in allegedly fabricating evidence in the dependency petitions she prepared for the court were part of the initiation and pursuit of child dependency proceedings. For which Herrera was entitled to absolute immunity. She is entitled only to qualified immunity. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Lacey Doe is the four year old daughter of George Doe and Robin Doe.1 On November 2. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="730"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-8018.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on consolidated brief for respondent.</FONT></P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="728"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/07/01-1365.htm">01-1365 -- SHEALY V. SHEALY -- 07/08/2002<BR></A><BR> Where the parties are engaged in a custody dispute over Sierra. Shealy's removal of Sierra was not wrongful. Shealy are United States citizens who were married in the United States. Was born in the United States on May 22. Was assigned to a three year tour in Germany. The family court ordered that an opinion be obtained from a court appointed social worker in an effort to determine which parent should have custody. Shealy and Sierra were scheduled to meet with a social worker for an interview the following month. The court's holding was based on its view that unilateral removal of the child was not necessary for military reasons as required by its prior order. Holding that the transfer <em>was </em>necessary for military reasons. <p> It is true that she moved the child to the United States somewhat earlier than <em>absolutely</em> necessary. Since she will have to be in the United States anyway for military reasons as of the end of July 2001. <p> <em>Id.</em> at 480 81 (emphasis added). Although Sierra is no longer in Germany. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="726"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200507/03-7143a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Robert J. With him on the brief were Robert M. It places others in programs geared to youths who have committed less serious crimes or seem relatively likely to stay out of trouble. No minimum standards were required of District providers generally. Who did have experience with at risk youths but. Nor did these doors have locks. Doors leading into individual units did have locks. All of which was the case at Queenstown </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="724"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2387.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Associates</SPAN> were on brief. Were on brief. We have recognized that an error in interpretation or application of the Guidelines may suffice to warrant a <SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="722"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-2424_025.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The convention is aimed at parties to custody battles who remove the child from the child's domicile to a country whose courts the removing 2 No. 06 2424 parent thinks more likely to side with that parent. The convention requires that the determination of whether the removal of the child was wrongful be made under the law of the country in which the child has his or her </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="720"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/00-7008a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Kevin C. Was on the brief for amicus curiae District of Columbia Financial Responsibility & Management Assistance Authority. On the brief were Brendan V. The District of Columbia contends that the officers are enti tled to qualified immunity because. It was not clearly established prior to Eric Butera's death that the officers' conduct would violate these rights. The appeal presents two questions of first impression in this circuit: (1) whether the District of Columbia can be held constitutionally liable for failing to protect an individual who is not in custody from harm inflicted by a third party. Through which Eric Butera might have succeeded in proving a constitutional violation. Was not clearly established prior to his death. The officers were entitled to qualified immu nity. We also hold that there is no parental due process right to the company of an adult child who is independent. The officers were entitled to summary judgment on all claims brought under 42 U.S.C. s 1983. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="720"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-7008a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With </P> <P>him on the briefs were Kevin C. Was on the brief for </P> <P>amicus curiae District of Columbia Financial Responsibility </P> <P>&. On the brief </P> <P>were Brendan V. </P> <P>the District of Columbia contends that the officers are enti </P> <P>tled to qualified immunity because. It was not </P> <P>clearly established prior to Eric Butera's death that the </P> <P>officers' conduct would violate these rights. </P> <P>the appeal presents two questions of first impression in this </P> <P>circuit: (1) whether the District of Columbia can be held </P> <P>constitutionally liable for failing to protect an individual who </P> <P>is not in custody from harm inflicted by a third party. </P> <P>through which Eric Butera might have succeeded in proving a </P> <P>constitutional violation. Was not clearly established prior to </P> <P>his death. The officers were entitled to qualified immu </P> <P>nity. We also hold that there is no parental due process right </P> <P>to the company of an adult child who is independent. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="717"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/031276p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Determined that Christina's place of habitual residence at the time of her removal from Whiting's custody was Canada. An appeal in which both parties have been superbly represented by appointed counsel. The parties have addressed the issue of whether this appeal is moot given Christina's return to Canada. Whiting urges that Krassner should be judicially estopped from asserting that it is not moot because he took a contrary position earlier in the course of this litigation. We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. We find that Krassner is not judicially estopped from asserting that the case is not moot and. That the case is not moot. We will affirm the District Court's holding that Canada was Christina's place of habitual residence at the time of her removal. I. Factual and Procedural Background Christina Krassner was born on September 6. The two were unmarried at the time and never married subsequently. This acrimony and the couple's desire to live apart 3 were intensified by the tragic events of September 11. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="715"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2454.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.L.L.C.</SPAN> were on brief for appellant.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="711"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1747.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Rhoads</U> were on brief. Gesmer</U> were on brief. Says that John's petition should be denied and the children should not be sent back to Ireland because: 1) John is precluded from petitioning the district court under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. 2) the Hague Convention does not require children to be returned to their country of habitual residence when there is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="709"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/11/951554P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These defendants are Jesse Rouse. Who was acquitted by the jury. The children are referred to by initials in the text of this The jury acquitted the defendants of the remaining charges. The appellants raise twelve allegations of error in the trial of the case.1 We grant relief on two issues: (1) refusal to allow expert opinion testimony by a court appointed psychologist that the children's evidence and testimony became tainted by suggestive influences to which the children were subject in the investigation and trial. 11) whether the defendants were denied due process right to fair trial when the Department of Social Services. The appellants are entitled to a new trial on these grounds. Sufficiency of the evidence is not an issue. An examination of the record establishes that the medical evidence was inconclusive as to abuse or abuse by the defendants and that the children's reports of abuse may have been tainted by the influence of social workers and law enforcement officials who investigated and prepared the government's case. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="707"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May2000/985193.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Alleging they violated his constitutional rights because he was abused by the person with whom he was staying while in DYFS custody. Was admitted to the John F. Nicini told them that he was afraid of his father. Nicini continued to have difficulty at home and in school. DYFS was informed on October 9. That Nicini was not at school and that he had previously told the assistant principal that he would not return home.1 On October 10. That Nicini had been located and that he had repeated his refusal to return home and again stated that his father was abusive. Although the parties have not educated us as to the meaning of this agreement. After Nicini was located. Trigiani was unsure after Nicini'sfirst appointment on January 3. What happened thereafter is not clear from the record or the appendices submitted with the parties' briefs. Apparently Nicini was not admitted to JFK at that time. 1991 notes that Nicini was at JFK Hospital with an infected hand and might require admission to treat the infection. Bonnie Nicini reportedly stated that the plan was to hospitalize Nicini for depression. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-7.gif" ALT="702"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/09/97-1476.htm">97-1476 -- MALIK V. ARAPAHOE COUNTY DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES -- 09/14/1999<BR></A><BR> Finding sufficient disputed facts to support a conclusion that Coleman's actions were outside the scope of absolute immunity. Of particular concern to both officers was an area of the child's torso that appeared in some photos to indicate that the child's body was bruised. <p> Coleman learned that the person who sent the photos for processing was appellee Louise Malik. Malik sent the film to a processing plant in Texas for developing. <p> Carr informed Malik that sending or receiving through the mail photographs depicting child genitalia was a felony. Malik denied that the photographs were pornographic. She characterized them as artistic and denied that the shaded areas on Julie's torso in the photographs were the result of bruising. This will probably all go away. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="698"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D4AE53AB68BC970D88256D2E007BEE45/$file/0171529.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Barthelemy's petition for review is dismissed. Barthelemy was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. He is an BARTHELEMY v. Because he is an aggravated felon. Barthelemy is subject to immediate removal from this country unless he can establish that he is a United States citizen. 8 U.S.C. з 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The facts in this petition are not disputed. Barthelemy was born in Port au Prince. Neither Roger nor Enese were United States citizens at the time of Barthelemy's birth. Barthelemy was 11 years old. Roger was naturalized as a United States citizen in 1993 when Barthelemy was 14 years old. Whether Roger's naturalization derivatively conferred United States citizenship on Barthelemy is the issue before us. II We do not have jurisdiction to review a criminal alien's final order of removal. 8 U.S.C. з 1252(a)(2)(C). The petitioner claims he is a United States citizen not subject to removal. We have jurisdiction to determine whether the petitioner is an alien or a citizen. 8 U.S.C. з 1252(b)(5)(A). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="698"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C3D5D531A0D98C2C88256EFD00581696/$file/0335722.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. з 1291. I. BACKGROUND K.W.B. was born in February 1994 to Boozer and Mawe We Ta Lo Wilder Boozer ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="694"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0E6F8EA651FAE45288256CDE005E51B6/$file/0017266.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. Circuit Judge: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="689"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1997/97a1536p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: A grandmother alleges in this civil rights action that she was deprived of the custody of her granddaughter for five years in violation of rights secured by the Constitution. The defendants are Chester County Children & Youth Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="689"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FCBC8CC2D1B4C6E888256D3D006FDD5D/$file/0171529.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: On page 6841 of the slip opinion. Barthelemy's petition for review is dismissed. Barthelemy was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. He is an aggravated felon. Because he is an aggravated felon. Barthelemy is subject to immediate removal from this country unless he can establish that he is a United States citizen. 8 U.S.C. з 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The facts in this petition are not disputed. Barthelemy was born in Port au Prince. Neither Roger nor Enese were United States citizens at the time of Barthelemy's birth. Barthelemy was 11 years old. Roger was naturalized as a United States citizen in 1993 when Barthelemy was 14 years old. Whether Roger's naturalization derivatively conferred United States citizenship on Barthelemy is the issue before us. II We do not have jurisdiction to review a criminal alien's final order of removal. 8 U.S.C. з 1252(a)(2)(C). The petitioner claims he is a United States citizen not subject to removal. We have jurisdiction to determine whether the petitioner is an alien or a citizen. 8 U.S.C. з 1252(b)(5)(A). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="687"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3200203F0C7FC3AF88256FCB007A8815/$file/0273556.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor. GONZALES 3469 1632.1 We conclude that Minasyan is a derivative citizen of the United States pursuant to that provision. Is thus not subject to removal as a felon convicted of an aggravated offense. First entered the United States with his family when he was eight. He obtained lawful permanent resident status when he was ten. When he was fourteen. Minasyan was arrested on charges of first degree burglary and Under former INA з 321(a). Or (2) The naturalization of the surviving parent if one of the parents is deceased. Or (3) The naturalization of the parent having legal custody of the child when there has been a legal separation of the parents or the naturalization of the mother if the child was born out of wedlock and the paternity of the child has not been established by legitimation. If (4) Such naturalization takes place while such child is unmarried and under the age of eighteen years. (5) Such child is residing in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of the naturalization of the parent last naturalized under clause (1) of this subsection. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="687"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/034714p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> PA 15222 Counsel for Appellee OPINION OF THE COURT * Judge Chertoff heard oral argument in this case but resigned prior to the time the opinion was filed. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. з 46(d). 2 ROTH. We will reverse the District Court's decision to abstain and will remand the case for proceedings consistent with this opinion. I. Background 3 The undisputed facts are that Tsai Yi Yang and FuChiang Tsui are the mother and father. Yang is a resident of British Columbia. Tsui is a resident of Pittsburgh. At the time Yang's Petition was filed in the District Court. The child was located in Pittsburgh. We have appellate jurisdiction over the appeal from the District Court's final order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. 4 We exercise plenary review over the legal determination of whether the requirements for Younger abstention have been met and. The Hague Convention The Hague Convention is a multilateral treaty on parental kidnapping to which the United States and Canada are signatories. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="687"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-2831_014.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="687"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/002935P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Blue argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict finding him guilty. Three children were present that day. The mother of the youngest child (who was then twenty one months old) awoke from her stupor and saw her child enter the bathroom. Blue's pants were unzipped. His belt was unbuckled. His penis was exposed. Blue never challenged his confession in a pretrial motion to suppress and the confession was admitted at trial. A few days after the verdict was entered. A sentencing hearing was held before the district court. Contending there was no evidence to support the use of force. Arguing that no evidence was presented that the victim saw or perceived him as his grandfather and. The victim's mother was present at the residence during the evening and never relinquished custody of the child to him. Blue was sentenced to 210 months (17 years. 6 months) imprisonment and three years supervised release. 3 The issues presented on appeal are: (1) whether the district court erred in denying his post trial motion for a judgment of acquittal because the government's evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="681"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-1027_032.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Challenges a range of practices by Illinois' child welfare agency claimed to infringe parental rights that are protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The present appeal is from a preliminary injunction that the plaintiffs. Who are the appellants. The plaintiffs are also attempting to 2 No. 06 1027 appeal from the judge's class certification order. The purpose is to minimize disputes over what has been enjoined. The Ninth Circuit allows incorporation by reference if the material thus incorporated is physically attached. There is no reason to complicate the administration of the rule by such an interpretation. There are times when literal interpretation is best. This is one of them. The Ninth Circuit's approach would encourage just the kind of mistake that the rule aims to prevent the thoughtless attachment of separately composed documents when if the judge had integrated their contents into the injunction order he might have realized that they would not cohere with the rest of the order without changes. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="672"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr97/95-7091.wpd.html">HOLLINGSWORTH V. HILL<BR></A><BR> BACKGROUND The following facts are not in dispute. While her husband was gone. Received a copy of the Order he was to serve on Patricia Hollingsworth. Was frequently required to serve protective orders and summonses but was uncertain what this Order required him to do. The fifth item in the Order stated: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="670"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1994/94a0917p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This suit was brought on behalf of sixteen children who had been placed in DHS's care by orders of the Family Court Division of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="670"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/02/041923P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are officially immune from suit. DFS received the first of many hot line calls alleging Bass was battering and starving her five children. The caller reported: (1) scratches were seen on Larry's chest. (2) Bass was starving her children as punishment. (4) the children were searching through trash cans for food. (6) the children were so weak they could not drink from a glass without assistance. The hot line information was faxed immediately to Kansas City. 2 was warranted. Johnson was assigned to perform a family assessment that day on the Bass family. Dixon told Johnson Bass was working and the children were not at home. Johnson told Dixon to have Bass call her. The children also told Johnson that Larry and Gary were living with their father. Told Johnson that Larry and Gary were out of town visiting their grandparents. Johnson also noted Bass </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="668"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C4C7B63667DFB28088256B790060EA59/$file/0115096.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who is licensed to practice in Hawaii. Because both parents and the children are now permanently located in Hawaii. Was designed to address the problem of parental international child abduction.1 art. 1. The Signatories perceived that parents were wrongfully taking their children across international lines </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="665"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/07/021179P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jr. was convicted of one count of transporting child pornography (violating 18 U.S.C. з 2252A(a)(1)) and three counts of possessing child pornography (violating 18 U.S.C. з 2252A(a)(5)(B)). Wolk's primary argument on appeal is that the Supreme Court decision in Ashcroft v. Who was using the screen name of ^fish^. Wolk's wife answered and advised them that Wolk was at a training seminar. Two of the state officers traveled to Wolk's nearby office and informed him that a search warrant was being executed at his residence. The officers advised Wolk that although he did not have to return to his residence. At one point the cars were separated. ]it was of his own free will and that he was free to go at any time[. H]e was not under arrest. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="659"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/07/954056P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Contending that plaintiffs' claims were in essence based upon claims of violation of state laws and. Are not actionable under 42 U.S.C. з 1983. That defendants Rinehart and Jines are entitled to absolute immunity. Cox and Blair are based upon respondeat superior. Are not real parties in interest and should be dismissed. That plaintiffs have failed to show deprivation of a constitutional right in violation of due process. That defendants are entitled to absolute and qualified immunity. 671 (8th Cir. 1995). ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="657"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar98/96-4884.opn.html">STONE V. WALL (3/2/1998, NO. 96-4884)<BR></A><BR> We are inclined to vacate and remand. Attorneys' fees in connection with Stone's recovery of custody of the minor child S.P.S. </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG> Plaintiffs are residents of Mississippi. Stone is the parent and natural guardian of S.P.S. He was formerly married to the mother of S.P.S. Defendant Green is a resident of Virginia and is an attorney for Wall and Masterson. Wall is a resident of Florida and is the mother of Lindgren (grandmother of S.P.S.). Masterson is a resident of Colorado and is Wall's daughter (aunt of S.P.S.). </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG> In 1987 Stone and Lindgren were divorced in Virginia. Stone says that he then was informed by his ex wife. That she had been diagnosed with brain cancer and was not expected to live more than six months. Who was the parent and natural guardian of S.P.S. Even if a claim were stated. The motion was denied. </P> <P><U><CENTER></U>II.</CENTER> </P> <P><U>A. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="657"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar98/96-4884.opn.html">STONE V. WALL (3/2/1998, NO. 96-4884)<BR></A><BR> We are inclined to vacate and remand. Attorneys' fees in connection with Stone's recovery of custody of the minor child S.P.S. </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG> Plaintiffs are residents of Mississippi. Stone is the parent and natural guardian of S.P.S. He was formerly married to the mother of S.P.S. Defendant Green is a resident of Virginia and is an attorney for Wall and Masterson. Wall is a resident of Florida and is the mother of Lindgren (grandmother of S.P.S.). Masterson is a resident of Colorado and is Wall's daughter (aunt of S.P.S.). </STRONG></P> <P><STRONG> In 1987 Stone and Lindgren were divorced in Virginia. Stone says that he then was informed by his ex wife. That she had been diagnosed with brain cancer and was not expected to live more than six months. Who was the parent and natural guardian of S.P.S. Even if a claim were stated. The motion was denied. </P> <P><U><CENTER></U>II.</CENTER> </P> <P><U>A. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="657"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021087.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That they were immune from suit under the doctrine of qualified immunity. Holding that Shuster and Gomez were entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiffs' з 1983 claims. I Batten was born and raised in Bladen County. Although Soulis often held a job and worked away from the various apartments in which they were staying. Batten was afraid to escape or call the police or her relatives because she thought Soulis was acting on behalf of Michael Batten to deprive her of the custody and the companionship of Joanna. Michael Batten filed a custody proceeding in Florida and was granted sole custody of Joanna. Brittany was born to Batten and Soulis on July 10. While they were living in Riverside County. Soulis was acknowledged on the birth certificate as Brittany's father. Donnie Guy's trial on this misdemeanor charge was scheduled for January 27. The whereabouts of a party in possession of the child are not known. Or there is a reason to believe that such party may not appear although ordered to appear personally with the child pursuant to Section 5160. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="655"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ACCEC8941344ABFD88257300007CF2A7/$file/0575376.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. з 1252 and deny Moreno's petition.1 The government contends Moreno did not exhaust his statutory argument that his grandchildren meet 8 U.S.C. з 1101(b)(1)(F)(i)'s definition of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="652"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/032055p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No. 01 cv 01732) District Judge: Honorable Yvette Kane Converted to a Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals Pursuant to the Real ID Act of 2005 (A 24 003 878) Because we have converted the present case into a petition for direct review. We are required to substitute the Attorney General for the current respondent (Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement). 8 U.S.C. з 1252(b)(3)(A). * Argued May 9. Sitting by designation. 2 ** Appellee Mark Anthony Herbert Jordon filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. з 2241 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania challenging a final order to remove him on grounds that he is a non removable. We will vacate the District Court's decision. I. Facts and Procedural History Jordon was born in London. Were married at the time of his birth. When Jordon was fourteen years old. Jordon was convicted in the Supreme Court of New York. An immigration judge found that he was deportable under 8 U.S.C. з 1231(a)(2)(C) and entered an order of deportation in absentia on August 16. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="652"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D6A105AC85A737B288257042004BDD81/$file/0315687.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Opinion by Judge O'Scannlain This appeal was previously argued before another panel of this court. The case is ordered resubmitted as of the date of this opinion. 8397 8400 GAUDIN v. Circuit Judge: We are invited to decide whether two minor children. I The facts in this case are set out in prior opinions of this court. So we recapitulate the case's lengthy history only as is necessary for our decision today. Catherine Gaudin and John Remis have two children. Who in 2000 were living with Gaudin in Canada. Concerned about the way Gaudin was raising the children. Chief among them were the declaration of a clinical psychologist who examined the children. She reported the children's statements that they </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="652"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/04/01-4057.htm">01-4057 -- ROSKA V. PETERSON -- 04/29/2003<BR></A><BR> Chief Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-4187.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> In February 2000 fifteen month old Katia Dunn was seized by City of Elgin police officers acting pursuant to an out of state custody order. Natasha and Christian Dunn were married in North Carolina. Christian abandoned Natasha while she was pregnant with his child. Christian was also ordered to pay child support and contribute to Katia's medical expenses. Realized it was not issued by an Illinois court. The officers told her that they were there to take Katia pursuant to a North Carolina custody order. Natasha was told that if she refused to hand Katia to the officers. Officer Chrastka replied that they were going to do it. Officer Chrastka further stated that 4 No. 02 4187 there was nothing Natasha could do to prevent Katia from being taken. City of Elgin police officers are told during training that standby service requires officers to keep the peace but to not take any other actions. Number 74.2 states that Elgin police officers will not generally serve or enforce documents of civil process and that civil process is typically to be referred to the Sheriff's Department. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/08/00-2136.htm">00-2136 -- JOSEPH V. INGRAM -- 08/22/2001<BR></A><BR> Stable families. <p> Three years after the suit was filed and certified as a class action. The first decree was vacated and replaced with a second decree in September 1998. The Department countered with a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the suit is barred by New Mexico's sovereign immunity and that the district court should abstain from hearing the case pursuant to <u>Younger v. The Department cross appeals the district court's rejection of its Eleventh Amendment argument.<strong></strong> <p> <strong> </strong>We conclude that Appellants' claims under the Social Security Act are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Appellants' constitutional claims are barred by the <u>Younger</u> . The background to this appeal is relatively straightforward. The district court approved the settlement and entered a consent decree ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/01/00-2136.htm">00-2136 -- JOSEPH A. V. INGRAM -- 01/07/2002<BR></A><BR> <a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr2001/99-13347.man.html">BEKIER V. BEKIER (4/16/2001, NO. 99-13347)<BR></A><BR> Would govern this inquiry.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr2001/99-13347.man.html">BEKIER V. BEKIER (4/16/2001, NO. 99-13347)<BR></A><BR> Would govern this inquiry.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="648"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6B07C412D8CA2D8888256C850058E77C/$file/0016423p.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Bush is substituted for his predecessor. We have carefully reconsidered the question of Newdow's Article III standing in light of this custody order and affirm our holding that he has standing as a parent to continue to pursue his claim in federal court. Newdow had alleged in the district court that he was the father. This informal arrangement apparently was not subject to any custody order until February 6. To have sole legal custody as to the rights and responsibilities to make decisions relating to the health. If mutual agreement is not reached in the above. Banning may exercise legal control of [the child] that is not specifically prohibited or inconsistent with the physical custody order. The father shall have access to all of [the child's] school and medical records. Which we have granted. Banning's motion for leave to intervene presents a question of first impression in this Circuit which we are required to consider. Contending that tutoring for his dyslexic son was being provided by a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="646"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2001/00-14476.man.html">GOODMAN V. SIPOS (8/2/2001, NO. 00-14476)<BR></A><BR> The district court found that the plaintiffs were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="646"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2001/00-14476.man.html">GOODMAN V. SIPOS (8/2/2001, NO. 00-14476)<BR></A><BR> The district court found that the plaintiffs were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="639"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/05/02-6397a.htm">02-6397A -- IVES V. BOONE -- 05/03/2004<BR></A><BR> Senior Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="639"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/09/01-4057.htm">01-4057 -- ROSKA V. PETERSON -- 09/05/2002<BR></A><BR> The district court found that defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and dismissed the suit. He was wearing a parka even though it was 70 degrees outside. Was sweating. Roska apparently stated that Rusty was suffering from kidney failure. Who allegedly informed the nurse that he did not have kidney failure.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="637"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FDBAD6724F624EEB88256CCA00112B51/$file/0056770.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> No member of the court requested a vote on the en banc request and all of the judges on the panel have voted to deny a rehearing. The petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED. The Appellant's emergency motion for immediate release is DENIED. The Appellee's emergency motion for modification of the opinion is GRANTED. Is amended as follows: Slip Op. page 29. Change </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="637"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043254p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner Carrol Morgan is subject to an Order of Removal pursuant to section 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Petitioner contends that she is not removable because she obtained derivative United States citizenship upon her mother's naturalization while her parents allegedly were separated. Because petitioner cannot establish that her parents were legally separated at the time her mother was naturalized. We will deny the petition for review. While the child is under the age of eighteen. The parent with legal custody of the child is naturalized while that child's parents are legally separated. 8 U.S.C. з 1432(a)(3). Petitioner was born in Jamaica in 1968. When petitioner was age sixteen. Her mother was naturalized. Neither petitioner nor her father have ever been naturalized. Petitioner was charged with being an alien convicted of an aggravated felony and therefore subject to removal. Because she was born out of wedlock. She was eligible for derivative citizenship under 8 U.S.C. з 1432 upon her mother's naturalization. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="635"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3290_009.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Nahquaseh Waubanascum was placed into foster care in the Shawano County. That Shawano County owed no constitu 2 No. 04 3290 tional duty to Waubanascum and thus is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Waubanascum was raised by his grandparents on the Menominee Indian Reservation in Wisconsin. When Waubanascum was around fifteen years old. Fry was the principal at the Menominee Indian Junior/Senior High School. One wrinkle was that Fry's home was located not in Menominee County. The process was lengthy and detailed. The home study concluded that Fry was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="633"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6DC31565EE9861E088256C930001F0D4/$file/0056770.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Michael Alvarado was convicted of second degree murder and attempted robbery and is currently serving a 15 year to life sentence in California state prison. Alvarado's conviction was obtained primarily based on statements he made during a two hour interrogation that occurred when he was 17 years old. Alleging that he was deprived of his Fifth Amendment rights in violation of Miranda v. Our review of this case is governed by the Anti Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). Which permits us to grant a federal writ of habeas corpus only if the underlying state court decision is either contrary to. The Supreme Court established the legal principle that juvenile defendants are. Haley and its progeny are highly instructive precedents to the case now before us. If a juvenile is more susceptible to police coercion during a custodial interrogation. Then the same juvenile is also more susceptible to the impression that he is. 112 (1995) (stating that an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="633"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/05/962197P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. James Stevens is currently serving a 200 year sentence of imprisonment with the Missouri Department of Corrections for a 1971 second degree murder conviction. Was born. Stevens continued to have custody of his young daughter. When he was returned to prison on a parole violation and subsequent conviction. Recited that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="633"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200213654.opn2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND & PROCEDURAL HISTORY Anton Pusztai and Anita Yates ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="631"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Dec2003/022708p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court granted summary judgment on the ground that McCurdy was precluded from bringing his з 1983 action after he had entered into an agreement with Dawson's mother to share the proceeds from her settlement of a prior civil action against the same defendants here. That there is a controlling. Threshold issue which obviates the need to address preclusion: that is. We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. Donta Dawson was sitting alone in a parked car. The headlights and interior lights were on. The radio was audible. Officer Dodd inquired why Dawson was parked on the street and whether he needed any 4 assistance. Repeated demands to show his hands were met with Dawson's silence. A subsequent investigation revealed that Dawson was unarmed. Although the familial relationships between the decedent and his parents are important to this case. The factual record is disturbingly incomplete in material respects.1 Dawson was the son of Cynthia Dawson and Bobby McCurdy. These gaps in the factual record are directly attributable to McCurdy's failure to respond to their Requests for Admission. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="629"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1477.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> H. Smith with whom Quinlan & Smith was on brief for appellant. P.C. were on brief for Children's Aid and Family Service of Hampshire County. Sanborn & Williams was on brief for Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Stephanie Flinker. P.C. was on brief for Denise Gelinas. Richardson and Gelinas were on brief for Edward N. This is an appeal from a grant of summary judgment on immunity grounds for defendants in a civil rights suit. Standard of Review Standard of Review Our review of a grant of summary judgment is plenary. A summary judgment motion will only be granted when </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="629"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3B235B372AEA6EF188256CEE0080CC3B/$file/0150495.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> McCoy challenges the section of the federal statute that prohibits the possession of child pornography made with materials that have traveled in interstate commerce. We hold that 18 U.S.C. з 2252(a)(4)(B) is unconstitutional as applied to simple intrastate possession of a visual depiction (or depictions) that has not been mailed. Or transported interstate and is not intended for interstate distribution. Were or are commercial producers of child pornography. At the time charges were filed against the McCoys. Kala were spending an evening at home. Her two older children were placed with foster care parents. Although only Kala was alleged to have played any role in the event that led to the arrest of her mother and stepfather. 1 UNITED STATES v. This pose was captured in one photograph. Rhonda was also charged with one count of manufacturing child pornography using materials transported in interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C. з 2251(a).3 Rhonda and Jonathan filed It is. District attorney declined to file charges). 3 Although з 2251 is generally referred to as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="624"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-4127b.htm">99-4127B -- JOHNSON V. RODRIGUES (OROZCO) -- 08/28/2000<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="624"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-4127a.htm">99-4127A -- JOHNSON V. RODRIGUES (OROZCO) -- 08/28/2000<BR></A><BR> Where the word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="624"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-4127.htm">99-4127 -- JOHNSON V. RODRIGUES -- 08/28/2000<BR></A><BR> Who were joined as defendants. We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="624"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/00/00-4230.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brokaw was removed from her parents' home based on allegations of child neglect. Aunt and uncle (who was 1 This case has been treated as a successive appeal and submitted to the original panel under Operating Procedure 6(b). The panel has concluded that another oral argument is unnecessary. The district court held that A.D.'s suit was barred by the Rooker Feldman doctrine because. A.D. was challenging the validity of the state removal proceedings. Brokaw were forcibly removed from their parents' home by a Mercer County Deputy Sheriff and a Mercer County Probation Officer. James Brokaw (who was a Deputy Sheriff for Mercer County). Karen and James allegedly falsely claimed that C.A. and A.D. were victims of child neglect. Is unclear because there was no official record compiled during that meeting. At that time there was no official proceeding pending involving C.A. and A.D. Demanding to know what was going on. One of the men allegedly replied: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="620"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/10/01-1053a.htm">01-1053 -- GONZALES V. CITY OF CASTLE ROCK -- 10/15/2002<BR></A><BR> Gonzales alleged that plaintiffs' substantive and procedural due process rights were violated when defendant police officers failed to enforce a restraining order against her estranged husband. Gonzales was seeking enforcement of the order. The order was entered into the central registry of restraining orders. The order was served on Mr. Gonzales was excluded from the family home and was prohibited from molesting or disturbing the peace of Ms. Simon Gonzales abducted the three girls while they were playing outside their house. Gonzales discovered the children were gone. Officers Brink and Ruisi were sent to the Gonzales home. The Officers </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="620"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971723.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We agree that the ordinance is constitutional and affirm the judgment of the district court. Minors may participate in any activity during curfew hours if they are accompanied by a parent. The ordinance exempts minors who are engaged in interstate travel. Are on the sidewalk abutting their parents' residence. Or are involved in an emergency. The ordinance does not affect minors who are </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="616"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/434B5715EDC3887788256BD000037084/$file/0115491.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the briefs. Rose was on the briefs. At the time of the assault Earl was a ward of the State of Nevada placed in the foster home of Joe's parents. John and Jane Roe.1 This suit is maintained on behalf of Earl by Tonnie Savage. Was responsible for Earl's case as well as those of his brother and sister. The biologically related members of the foster family have been re named </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="616"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/04/951554P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> During the The victims are granddaughters of Rosemary Rouse. R. was placed with Donna Jordan. Who reported to the Tribe's Department of Social Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="616"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1053.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The mandate is issued forthwith. Gonzales alleged that plaintiffs' substantive and procedural due process rights were violated when defendant police officers failed to enforce a restraining order against her estranged husband. Gonzales was seeking enforcement of the order. The order was entered into the central registry of restraining orders. The order was served on Mr. Gonzales was excluded from the family home and was prohibited from molesting or disturbing the peace of Ms. Simon Gonzales abducted the three girls while they were playing outside their house. Gonzales discovered the children were gone. Officers Brink and Ruisi were sent to the Gonzales home. The Officers </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="613"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/01/052499P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Deputy Andy Galles was working as a narcotics officer for Crow Wing County. Simon gave a specific address where his sister was living. Simon stated that he wanted his sister out of the drug world and that he was concerned for Deason's seven year old son. Deputy Galles stated that his suspicions were heightened when he confirmed the information provided by Simon. Deputy Galles testified that his training taught him that frequent car rental by people who already have a mode of transportation is common among individuals who are distributing or trafficking narcotics because changing cars allows them to camouflage their activities. Was riding with her at the time of the stop. Kim Simon was taken into custody because an active warrant existed in Wright County for her arrest. Deason was released with a citation for possession of drug paraphernalia and a written warning for the suspended object hanging from her mirror. A Minnesota state trooper stopped Deason for speeding while she was driving a rental vehicle. Was with her boyfriend. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="613"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/06/951908P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendants are protected by qualified immunity. the reasons discussed below. Background It is undisputed that SCAN. Lynn Sims and Geneva Wordlaw were at all relevant times employees of SCAN. That she was. Collie and was passing along to Goin. at 151. When Anthony was brought to Dr. Anthony was admitted to LeBonheur Hospital for Referring to that a period from November 5. There [were] no episodes of paleness. Anthony was sent home with an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="611"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/972151.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Bishop ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="607"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0172n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were found guilty of conspiring to receive child pornography. Possessing a computer on which it was stored. Adkins' contentions are similar to her husband's in many respects. We are not persuaded that the district court erred in denying the defendants' motions to suppress. We are persuaded. That re sentencing is appropriate under United States v. The stated purpose was to seek evidence that Mr. Adkins might have been involved. Adkins was a babysitter. Agent Vito explained that some child sex offenders are categorized as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="605"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1052.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on brief. Excerpts of which from time to time have occupied the attention of no fewer than ten federal and state judges across the nation. The CSRA issue is new to us and the FDCPA issue has not. Neither the propriety of the ceiling nor the Michigan court's treatment of the Georgia court's decree is at issue here. 3 CSRA. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT Bongiorno challenges his conviction principally on the ground that the CSRA is an unconstitutional exercise of Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause. Only $11.2 billion was paid. Where enforcement of support is particularly difficult. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="603"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0644n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sitting by designation. Mary Jordan ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="603"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/01EE5910A3140F91882573050059C939/$file/0516976.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: This case raises the question whether social workers are entitled to absolute immunity for verified statements in peti BELTRAN v. We hold that they are. Seeking to have Coby made subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. The BelBecause this case is before the panel on a 12(b)(6) motion. SANTA CLARA COUNTY trans assert that much of this information is untrue and that Suarez and Tjhin deliberately fabricated evidence and suppressed information favorable to the Beltrans. A Protective Custody Warrant was issued by the court that same day. Coby was removed from his parents' custody pursuant to the warrant and placed in a children's shelter. An initial detention hearing was held and the court found that Coby should be detained and temporarily placed under the care and supervision of the Department of Family and Children's Services. The dependency petition was denied and Coby was returned to his parents by order of the juvenile court. The district court concluded that Tjhin and Suarez were entitled to absolute immunity for their actions in connection with the signing and filing of the custody and dependency petitions. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="600"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200414820.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are required to accept the facts alleged in the complaint as true and view them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. They are currently raising two children: one child is the couple's biological daughter. The other child is an adopted son. The Behrenses are unable to have 2 any more biological children. While Behrens was carrying his adopted son. Who was nine months old at the time. The DCF was notified of possible child abuse. Civil dependency and criminal investigations were initiated. The criminal investigation was closed because the alleged abuse was determined to be unfounded and/or accidental. Finding that child abuse was not shown by a preponderance of the evidence.1 Despite the closure of the criminal investigation and the circuit court's finding. Florida courts have explained that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-6.gif" ALT="600"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/12/01-6359.htm">01-6359 -- LOWTHER V. LOWTHER -- 12/31/2002<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov97/95-2799.man.html">WYKE V. POLK COUNTY SCH. BD.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Wyke v. These consolidated appeals raise the following issues: (1) whether plaintiff's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/004701.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Line 6 of second paragraph the section number is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov97/95-2799.man.html">WYKE V. POLK COUNTY SCH. BD.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Wyke v. These consolidated appeals raise the following issues: (1) whether plaintiff's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19952799.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These consolidated appeals raise the following issues: (1) whether plaintiff's з 1983 claim was so </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19952799.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> These consolidated appeals raise the following issues: (1) whether plaintiff's з 1983 claim was so </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTE2NzctYWdfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-1677-ag_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who was removable on account of his conviction for a controlled substance offense. We hold that 8 U.S.C. з 1432(a)(3) (repealed 2000) requires the parents of a legitimated alien child to effect a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="598"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/12/02-1388.htm">02-1388 -- U.S. V. ROBERTSON -- 12/02/2003<BR></A><BR> The Sentencing Commission has imposed a two point enhancement when the internet is used either to induce a minor to engage in prohibited sexual conduct or to facilitate travel for that purpose. Reaches broadly to cover any instance in which a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="596"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FBE4F1C02226B21C882570760014CC04/$file/0472487.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who are United States citizens. Petitioner fails to demonstrate that the agency's interpretation or application of the statute is inconsistent with the Convention. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Petitioner is a citizen of Mexico who has lived in the United States continuously since 1992. He was served with a Notice to Appear that charged him with removability for being present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled. Have a ten year old son and an eight year old daughter who were born in the United States. Petitioner and Morales have decided that. If Petitioner is removed to Mexico. The children will stay in this country with their mother or with one of their permanent resident relatives so that the children can take advantage of this country's superior educational and economic opportunities. Petitioner would be separated from his children if he were removed. They also teach him about what they have learned at school. Have been learning English through bilingual instruction.). When they were apart recently because of Petitioner's brief incarceration. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="596"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0499n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Ricky Pittman is the biological father of Najee Waters ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="596"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0021p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arianna was born with significant brain damage. 2001 she was admitted to Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. Was assigned to Arianna's case. Maas decided that Marlena was a danger to Arianna and that Marlena should not be permitted to take Arianna home. Arianna was transferred to another medical facility. Hamilton County continued its investigation of the Kottmyers despite receiving information from the medical staff treating Arianna that there was no basis for investigating the Kottmyers. The Kottmyers alleged that they were treated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec98/97-4336.man.html">UNITED STATES V. BRAND (12/31/1998, NO. 97-4336)<BR></A><BR> Appellant Abraham Brand was found guilty of willfully failing to pay a past due support obligation. Arguing that his failure to pay was not willful. That the state court order that formed the basis of his support obligation under the Act is invalid. That he is unable to pay. Three children were born to this union: a girl in 1980. Brand was a successful entrepreneur. Neither Brand nor his lawyer were present at the final hearing. Which was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec98/97-4336.man.html">UNITED STATES V. BRAND (12/31/1998, NO. 97-4336)<BR></A><BR> Appellant Abraham Brand was found guilty of willfully failing to pay a past due support obligation. Arguing that his failure to pay was not willful. That the state court order that formed the basis of his support obligation under the Act is invalid. That he is unable to pay. Three children were born to this union: a girl in 1980. Brand was a successful entrepreneur. Neither Brand nor his lawyer were present at the final hearing. Which was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19974336.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellant Abraham Brand was found guilty of willfully failing to pay a past due support obligation. Arguing that his failure to pay was not willful. That the state court order that formed the basis of his support obligation under the Act is invalid. That he is Honorable Donald P. While this appeal was pending. Three children were born to this union: a girl in 1980. Brand was a successful entrepreneur. Neither Brand nor his lawyer were present at the final hearing. Which was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2002/00-14592.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. HERSH (7/17/2002, NO. 00-14592)<BR></A><BR> He was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/95-4197.htm">95-4197 -- J.B. V. WASHINGTON COUNTY (UTAH) -- 10/07/1997<BR></A><BR> The purpose of this seizure was to obtain an interview with the child outside her parents' presence to investigate a report that the child's father had sexually abused her. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2002/00-14592.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. HERSH (7/17/2002, NO. 00-14592)<BR></A><BR> He was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3628_021.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue before us is whether the United States Constitution. In which 2 No. 04 3628 we held that a parent's constitutional liberty interest in his relationship with his adult son was violated when his son was killed by police. We conclude that Bell was wrongly decided and must be overruled.1 We hold that the federal Constitution does not allow a parent to recover in such circumstances. It is unnecessary to resolve these factual disputes here. Robert Russ was driving from the Northwestern campus in Evanston. The chase began as Russ was heading southbound on Lake Shore Drive. We have circulated it among all judges of this Court in regular active service pursuant to Circuit Rule 40(e). Several months before he was killed. Russ's paternity was confirmed through DNA testing after the child's birth. The district judge to whom this case was originally assigned. This case was reassigned to Judge Der Yeghiayan in August 2003. Discussion Summary judgment is appropriate if the evidence presented by the parties </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200014592.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200116723ord.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BY THE COURT: The Court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the Court and a majority of the Circuit Judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor of it (Rule 35. The Petition for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED. /s/ J L EDMONDSON Chief Judge 2 BIRCH. Specially Concurring in the Denial of Rehearing En Banc: The dissents to the denial of rehearing en banc both agree that the Equal Protection Clause challenge to the Florida statute at issue should have been embraced by our court. 4 the vociferous dissent by my sister jurist (for whom I have great respect and affection). The Florida adoption statute at issue is constitutionally flawed. The Lofton panel's analysis and approach in this case was premised on a fundamental principal or philosophy. When he observed: Courts are not representative bodies. They are not designed to be a good reflex of a democratic society. ... Their essential quality is detachment. History teaches that the independence of the judiciary is jeopardized when courts become embroiled in the passions of the day and assume primary responsibility in choosing between competing political. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="594"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19974336.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appellant Abraham Brand was found guilty of willfully failing to pay a past due support obligation. Arguing that his failure to pay was not willful. That the state court order that formed the basis of his support obligation under the Act is invalid. That he is unable to pay. Three children were born to this union: a girl in 1980. Brand was a successful entrepreneur. Including a While this appeal was pending. Neither Brand nor his lawyer were present at the final hearing. Which was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="592"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052609np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner Cesar August Montes De Oca Montero petitions this court for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="592"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/05/02-6397.htm">02-6397 -- IVES V. BOONE -- 05/03/2004<BR></A><BR> The district court rejected eight of the nine claims because they </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="592"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021139.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> When the substance of the manuscript was relevant to the issues in the child custody proceeding and the defendants' use of the manuscript was solely for its content and not for its mode of expression. BLUM were represented by a member of the firm and thus were acting pro se. Bond's manuscript was entitled Self Portrait of a Patricide: How I Got Away with Murder. Who was formerly known as William Rovtar. Was 17. After Rovtar was arrested and detained in a juvenile detention facility in Ohio. He entered into a guilty plea agreement in juvenile court with the result that in September 1981 he was transferred to the Sheppard & Enoch Pratt Hospital in Baltimore. Rovtar was released in 1982. Although verifiable facts of the murder are consistent with the details provided in the manuscript. Bond has now stated in an affidavit that the manuscript is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="592"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/09/01-4150.htm">01-4150 -- U.S. V. TUCKER -- 09/16/2002<BR></A><BR> Was convicted of one count of possession of child pornography. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="589"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/may95/93-3340.opa.html">LENZ V. WINBURN<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Lenz v. Facts<p> <p> Donald and Shirley Lenz (the elder Lenzes or the Lenzes) have a son named Kurt.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="589"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct97/95-4197.wpd.html">J.B. V. WASHINGTON COUNTY<BR></A><BR> The purpose of this seizure was to obtain an interview with the child outside her parents' presence to investigate a report that the child's father had sexually abused her. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm. BACKGROUND Washington County Deputy Pamela Humphreys was presented with a dilemma when she received an eyewitness report that a seven year old child. The school interview procedure was not available because L.B. was home schooled. Who is authorized by statute to prosecute any person charged with abuse or neglect before the juvenile court. Deputy County Attorney Langston concurred (1) See Utah Code Ann. 62A 4a 101(16)(b) (1997) (protective services provided by the Division of Child and Family Services are in part to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="589"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTM0OTgtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-3498-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the record is insufficient for us to assess the validity of the special condition. While Myers was staying overnight at his girlfriend's home. Who was also staying overnight. Stated that he had realized </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="589"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may95/93-3340.opa.html">LENZ V. WINBURN<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Lenz v. Facts<p> <p> Donald and Shirley Lenz (the elder Lenzes or the Lenzes) have a son named Kurt.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="587"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr95/93-9158.opa.html">WOOTEN V. CAMPBELL<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ><title>Wooten v. Wooten ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="587"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr95/93-9158.opa.html">WOOTEN V. CAMPBELL<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ><title>Wooten v. Wooten ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="585"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-7044a.html">A. LASHAWN V. BARRY JR. MARION S.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="585"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/96a0025p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. The Question Presented This is a direct criminal appeal by a convicted Tennessee state judge. Section 242 was adopted as a codification of prior law in 1874 during the period of Reconstruction in the aftermath of the Civil War. It criminalizes without any further definition the willful </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="585"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200314850.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND Melissa Green Tenorio and Juan Tenorio Ruiz met when Melissa was an exchange student in Mexico. Melissa discovered she was pregnant. Juan visited when the baby was born and returned to Minnesota when he graduated from high school. The marriage was not a happy one. The move was largely financed by Juan's father. Juan and his father told Melissa's mother that it was for a trial period and that if it did not work out. Melissa testified that her understanding of the move was that they would not even live in the same town as her in laws. Juan was also having difficulty with his father and brother in the family business. Juan was physically and verbally abusive. She called Juan and said she was not returning. Holding that Juan failed to prove that the habitual residence of the children was Mexico. That within six months things were not working out. That even Juan was having second thoughts about staying. That Melissa's return to Mexico in 2002 was only an effort to save the 4 marriage. Rather that the family was in limbo during that time. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="583"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-1430_008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which was investigated by Detective David Farrow. Child abduction charges were filed against Mannoia and he was arrested in Maui. The charges against him were later dropped. The district court found that 2 No. 06 1430 there was probable cause to support the issuance of the arrest warrant and granted Farrow's summary judgment motion in its entirety. We affirm the district court's judgment because Mannoia has not shown that Farrow deliberately or with a reckless disregard for the truth made misrepresentations to the issuing judge that were necessary to her probable cause determination. We conclude that Farrow is protected from Mannoia's suit by the defense of qualified immunity. The order indicated that Christine was the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="583"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9F8F6256C84F54DD88256F63007B830C/$file/0330274.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> WISE Facts Wise was convicted in 2003 of a crime of dishonesty. Claiming somewhat implausibly (she was 47 years old) that she had never had a driver's license. Wise was indicted under 18 U.S.C. з 1001 for two counts of lying to the federal government for her lies to the Social Security Administration and the Postal Service. Who was in prison. He drove toward where Wise was waiting. Holding a gun that was pointed at him. Wise was allowed to plead to misdemeanor negligent endangerment. There was more. A felon whom she had met while he was in jail. When a warrant was issued for Savage's arrest Wise ran away with him and the children. They were eventually apprehended in California when Wise was arrested for shoplifting. Savage pled guilty to the sexual abuse and was sentenced to 360 months imprisonment. While Savage was serving time for sexually abusing her children. Wise was caught smuggling child pornography to him in prison. Wise was barred from any physical visitation with her children until she completed counseling and demonstrated that she was fit to be a parent. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="579"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216956.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sitting by designation. * Ellen Storck appeals from the district court's entry of summary judgment based on its finding that Officer Joseph McHugh of the Coral Springs Police Department ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="576"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/450682951C5E712788256D0F007A5456/$file/0135740.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kirtley's complaint alleges she was the victim of a conspiracy to deprive her of custody over her granddaughter. STANDARD OF REVIEW Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim is reviewed de novo. A з 1983 action can lie against a private party when </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="576"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4158.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Croxford raises two issues on appeal: (i) whether 18 U.S.C. 2251(a) is facially unconstitutional or unconstitutional as applied. (1) and (ii) (1) This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent. Sitting by designation. (1) Croxford also raises on appeal whether 18 U.S.C. 2252A(a)(5)(B) is facially unconstitutional or unconstitutional as applied. We will not. While the parties have continued to address the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 2252A(a)(5)(B) in their briefs. Under which he was indicted but not convicted. Is facially constitutional and constitutional as applied to Croxford's conduct. Because the statute's application to Croxford's conduct is constitutional. Croxford also confirmed in the interview that he owned a Sony digital camera and was an Internet provider for certain customers. The Sony digital camera that the officers took from Croxford's home were manufactured outside of the state of Utah. Which visual depiction was produced using materials that have been transported in interstate commerce. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="576"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199805/96-7239a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Le vine were on the briefs. Spitzer were on the brief. Attorney at the time the brief was filed. Were on the brief for the United States of America as amicus curiae. Ordinance that the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had held was constitutional. Act bars unmarried and unemanci pated persons 1 under seventeen years old from being in 1 Although the curfew law is entitled the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="576"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200412367.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was killed by Officer Hecksel during a traffic stop. Whether a parent has such a right vis р vis her adult child is a question of first impression for this Court. Corey Rice ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="576"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043664np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm in part and vacate in part the District Court's judgment. We will briefly summarize only those facts essential to our disposition of this appeal. Was removed from their home by his maternal aunt. Where he was interviewed and examined by BCCYS employee. Who had received a report that Travonne was being physically abused by Kevin Brown. It is unclear from the record what transpired until July 9. When a Juvenile Court hearing was conducted. The appellees were entitled to In their complaint. Was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="574"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Aug2004/Aug31/02-11362-CV1.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While he was in the custody of a state licensed foster family. We conclude that Lilly and Purdin were entitled to qualified and official immunity. Therefore the district court's denial of the motion to dismiss the claims against Lilly and Purdin is reversed. Are tragic in fact. Where he was diagnosed with a spiral fracture of the right femur. Because Olalde's explanation was not consistent with Eric's injury. The Clauds' home was frequently described by CPS case workers as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="574"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3421_028.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While he was enrolled at Franklin Middle School in Champaign. He was repeatedly molested by the school's Dean of Students. That Champaign Community Schools Unit District No. 4 and various school officials were deliberately indifferent to the abuse. Because it was relevant to his claim for compensatory damages. We conclude the Does are entitled to a new trial for three reasons. I. BACKGROUND John Doe first enrolled at Franklin Middle School in 1993 as a sixth grader.1 The parties do not dispute that Doe was 1 John Doe and the other putative victims are all African Americans. Smith is Caucasian. Underprivileged African American boys because they were particularly vulnerable and less likely (continued...). No. 04 3421 3 a troubled child whose classroom conduct was disruptive at times. Smith would often seek out Doe on the playground and order him to Smith's office because he was a troublemaker.2 At trial. Smith invited Doe to have breakfast with him. Was the beginning of the molestation. Sexual grooming is </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="574"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200314326.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Or that was produced using materials that have been mailed. Definitions of з 2252A's terms are contained in 18 U.S.C. з 2256. The section was amended just days before Maxwell's trial. The amendments are of no moment in this case. з 2256. Data stored on computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image. Its case relied on establishing that the images were produced by materials that did. The first three grounds are insufficient to warrant reversal. The fourth ground is that the application of з 2252A(a)(5)(B) to the facts of his case amounts to an unconstitutional exercise of the Commerce Clause. (B) such visual depiction is. Or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Or (D) such visual depiction is advertised. Or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. (9) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="574"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Aug2004/Aug25/02-11362-CV0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While he was in the custody of a state licensed foster family. We conclude that Lilly and Purdin were entitled to qualified and official immunity. Therefore the district court's denial of the motion to dismiss the claims against Lilly and Purdin is reversed. Are tragic in fact. Where he was diagnosed with a spiral fracture of the right femur. Because Olalde's explanation was not consistent with Eric's injury. The Clauds' home was frequently described by CPS case workers as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="574"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Aug2004/Aug31/02-11362-CV0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While he was in the custody of a state licensed foster family. We conclude that Lilly and Purdin were entitled to qualified and official immunity. Therefore the district court's denial of the motion to dismiss the claims against Lilly and Purdin is reversed. Are tragic in fact. Where he was diagnosed with a spiral fracture of the right femur. Because Olalde's explanation was not consistent with Eric's injury. The Clauds' home was frequently described by CPS case workers as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="572"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/021788np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Based on a determination that the debt owed to Walker by the Debtors was non dischargeable in bankruptcy. We will affirm the District Court's decision for the reasons stated below. The guardian ad litem.1 The total guardian ad litem fee was $20. Of which the Debtors were ordered to pay $16. 000 and the natural parents were 2 1 On March 13. Arguing that the guardian ad litem fee owed by the Debtors was not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Ruling that the guardian ad litem fee was non dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. з 523(a)(5). While the Debtors' appeal to this Court was pending. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 28 U.S.C. з 158(d). Whether the guardian ad litem fee is dischargeable under з 523(a)(5) is a question of federal law. Discussion The sole issue here is whether a guardian ad litem fee in a contested adoption proceeding is non dischargeable in bankruptcy under з 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code. We conclude that the guardian ad litem fee at issue here is non dischargeable under з 523(a)(5). Although the guardian ad litem services were rendered before the Debtors became Ashley's adoptive parents (though while they had court ordered custody of her). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="570"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTkyNzQgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/02-9274%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were lawful. The Appellants contend that the searches were unlawful for lack of a reasonable basis to believe either that the juveniles had done anything that would be a crime if committed by an adult or had possessed weapons or other contraband. We conclude that the searches conducted upon each initial entry into the custody of the State's juvenile authorities were lawful. Violated the Fourth Amendment in the absence of reasonable suspicion that contraband was possessed. A juvenile is either a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="570"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-3669.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jr. is a former Milwaukee police officer who was arrested for physically abusing a child. Though he was not prosecuted. Anderer was terminated following an internal affairs investigation into this incident. Finding that probable cause existed at the time Anderer was arrested and that the 2 No. 02 3669 speech at issue was not protected by the First Amendment. After the juveniles were handcuffed. While they were being escorted to the patrol cars. One 12 year old boy (whom we will call JR) started shouting that one of the officers who was escorting him to the car. Was touching him on the buttocks and trying to rape him. Three of the juveniles were then transported to the police station by Officer Cook and his partner Officer Jeffrey Logan. JR was placed in a patrol car and driven to the station by Anderer. Several officers noticed that JR was bleeding from the nose and mouth and had blood on his clothing. Mary Hoerig and Because </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="570"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTkyNzRfb3BuLnBkZg==/02-9274_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were lawful. The Appellants contend that the searches were unlawful for lack of a reasonable basis to believe either that the juveniles had done anything that would be a crime if committed by an adult or had possessed weapons or other contraband. We conclude that the searches conducted upon each initial entry into the custody of the State's juvenile authorities were lawful. Violated the Fourth Amendment in the absence of reasonable suspicion that contraband was possessed. A juvenile is either a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="570"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-2882.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 83 year old Anna Gilvis was savagely beaten and stabbed to death in her home. 1 who was 10 years old at the time of the murder. Was charged with the crime and adjudged a delinquent after a 2 day trial in the Cook 1 This is not the petitioner's real name. The first being whether this appeal is moot because Morgan. Who is now 20 years old. Both insist that the case is not moot a federal court at any stage of the proceedings must. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="570"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/12/981564P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Chamberlain was sentenced to seven years and three months (87 months) in prison. To commence at the conclusion of a sentence Chamberlain is currently serving for a separate crime. We believe that Chamberlain's statements were made while he was in custody for Miranda purposes. The money Insight earned on the contracts was used to fund college programs for the inmates in the program. The statements Chamberlain sought to suppress on Miranda grounds were made during two interviews in which Chamberlain was questioned by investigators. The Miranda issue turns on the circumstances of these interviews н on whether Chamberlain was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="568"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-4199.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A state court determined that probable cause existed to believe that Kayla was at risk of 2 No. 01 4199 immediate harm at home with both parents. I. Background Kayla was born to Jensen and Stark on December 28. A report is indicated when DCFS investigates an allegation of child abuse and finds that credible evidence exists supporting the claim. 325 Ill. A DCFS Child Protection Investigator ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="568"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/12/01-1129.htm">01-1129 -- BOLIN V. CHAVEZ -- 12/12/2001<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff appellant Gregory Dean Bolin. 1291 and affirm. <p> <center>I.</center> <p> A detailed statement of facts concerning the proceedings in the underlying state court custody case is set forth in the district court's order of . We will not repeat it here. The relevant facts are as follows. <p> In 1993. Bolin was incarcerated in Colorado. Bolin was awarded visitation rights. Shortly after he was released from prison in Colorado in 1995. Bolin was arrested and charged with kidnapping. Although her initial motion was denied. Her second motion was granted and Bolin's custody and visitation rights were terminated as a result of orders entered by the Denver District Court on August 5 and September 2. That Judge Meyer was entitled to absolute judicial immunity regarding his actions and rulings in the custody proceedings. (3) that Bolin failed to allege sufficient facts to support his claim that Garin was engaged in a conspiracy with Judge Meyer. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="568"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992349.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 000 was entered against only one of the defendants Jill Mullineaux. Mullineaux contends that she was entitled to qualified immunity. We conclude that Mullineaux was not entitled to qualified immunity. We find that the award of damages was excessive. Knussman learned that his wife Kimberly was pregnant. Kim's pregnancy was difficult and ultimately resulted in her confinement to bed rest in the latter stages prior to delivery. Knussman was informed by the MSP Director of Flight Operations. That there was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="566"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/05/012848P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Once the dogs and weapons were secured. She informed him that he was not under arrest1 and that she was interested in speaking with him. Axsom told Hill he was willing to talk with her. Axsom did not recall the agent telling him he was not under arrest although he did not deny she may have made that statement. 21 During the interview. What his password was. Mensinger also asked Axsom whether he was molesting children. The agents' only concern with Axsom's movements was Axsom obtaining any of the numerous weapons spread throughout the house. Axsom also said </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="566"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2000/982041.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was pregnant. Have now sued Seip under 42 U.S.C.S 1983. A. Seventeen year old Leah Gruenke was an eleventh grader at Emmaus High School and a member of the varsity swim team. Began to suspect that Leah was pregnant. Seip observed that Leah was often nauseated. Leah's body was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="563"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E8695945B7C6F6B5882570AD0051320A/$file/0356499.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The questioning was part of a survey the Palmdale School District was conducting regarding psychological barriers to learning. Hold that there is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children. We also hold that parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as stu 15064 FIELDS v. We hold that the defendants' actions were rationally related to a legitimate state purpose. I. Kristi Seymour volunteered as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="561"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-1964.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were sexually abused by their respective foster fathers in foster homes selected for them by Ada S. Were both convicted of aggravated sexual assault. The case before us today is about the responsibility of various DCFS employees for the placement of J.H. and J.D. in the two homes in which they were abused. Luis Soto for allegedly violating their constitutional right to be free from placement in a foster home where the state knew or suspected that abuse was likely to occur. I. Background When J.H. was four years old and her brother. Was three years old. They entered the custody of DCFS as neglected minors after a juvenile court determined that their mother was unfit to care for them. It is undisputed that both J.H. and J.D. were sexually abused by Mr. The abuse was discovered once they were returned to the care of their natural father. It was revealed that Mr. Although subsequent DCFS investigations concluded that those allegations were unfounded. During the time period when J.H. and J.D. were living in the White and Hill homes. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="561"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/10/043966P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> All doctors involved with the case later concurred that the injuries would not have been apparent to a lay person. Although there was little evidence to suggest what role each parent might have played. When Michael was later deposed. United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 2 1 Defendant Alison Downs was the Department's intake social worker assigned to the case. She was present at the police station. Downs noted on the forms that there was possible sexual abuse. There was no evidence of sexual abuse. Who were willing to take C.A. into their home and/or move to care for C.A. in a different location. Melissa and Michael were each allowed one one hour supervised visit per week. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="561"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/10/004004P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. BACKGROUND Robert Hechter Silverman and Julie Hechter Silverman were married in 1989. They have two children. The Silvermans filed a voluntary petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court in which they declared under penalty of perjury that they were residing in Plymouth. Before she and the children were scheduled to return to Israel. Robert was personally served in Israel. An evidentiary hearing was scheduled for November 8. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is responsible for processing applications seeking the return of children wrongfully removed to or retained in the United States. 22 C.F.R. з 94.6. 2 At the hearing before a state court referee on October 10. Noting that the children's physical presence in Minnesota was the result of an allegedly wrongful removal from Israel. Argued that the only prerequisite to the court ruling on the merits of the custody issue was a finding that Minnesota was the children's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="561"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/039.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> IV and announcing the judgment in part V: Petitioner appellant Jeffrey Clayton Kandies was sentenced to death after being found guilty by a North Carolina jury of the firstdegree rape and first degree murder of Natalie Lynn Osborne. We subsequently issued Kandies a certificate of appealability for his claims that (1) his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance during the penalty phase by failing to investigate whether he was sexually abused as a child and (2) the North Carolina Supreme Court erred by concluding that the State's use of peremptory challenges to strike prospective African American jurors was not violative of the Supreme Court's holding in Batson v. Who is a Caucasian American. Who was his fiancee KANDIES v. Which is around the same time that Ms. Who noticed that Kandies's hand was beginning to swell. Suggested that Kandies have his hand examined by a medical technician that happened to be inside the store. Declined to have the medical technician examine his hand and immediately left the store. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="561"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F000BF96875E8BAA88256B6D00606B3C/$file/0130032.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is unconstitutional. 3208 I Cole Cameron Cummings married Dana Hopkins in 1989. All of whom were born in the United States and resided with their parents in the State of Washington. The oldest child ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="559"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961814A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It is an authority constrained by no less a power than that of the People themselves. The constitution is written. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="559"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/08C2E9937236E370882572BF0058795F/$file/0555211.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was also on the brief. Circuit Judge: We must decide whether the children of Dimitris and Yvette Papakosmas were habitual residents of Greece within PAPAKOSMAS v. Dimitris and Yvette Papakosmas were married in Las Vegas. The couple have two children together. Both children were born in Los Angeles. Never learning of the other sale until the family was in Greece. Although she contends that such sale was unrelated to the move but instead a result of the dog's behavior problems. Dimitris contends that Yvette's trip was to deal with a bounced check and to return a passport to her son from a previous marriage. Was also in Greece. Denies that she was his mistress. Yvette's wrist was cut and she was hospitalized. That Yvette's wound was selfinflicted. After Yvette was released from the hospital. Therefore determined that there was no shared. Because the court determined that Dimitris had failed to meet his burden of proving that Greece is the children's habitual residence. Which is stayed pending the outcome of these proceedings. 1 4252 PAPAKOSMAS v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="557"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/06/032487P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because we determine that there was no violation of a clearly established constitutional right. Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. By March 1985 Shirley was attempting to regain custody of plaintiffs. Shortly after the court ordered placement in 1985 and informed her that Amy had complained that someone was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="557"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042849p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The survey itself was designed to be voluntary and anonymous. Survey results were designed to be and actually were released only in the aggregate with no identifying information. We will affirm. The Parties Plaintiffs are Carol Nunn. We will refer to the student Plaintiffs as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2439.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Azzarito</SPAN> were on brief. P.C.</SPAN> were on brief. A.D. was then seven and C.D. was almost three years old. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/12/044032P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Tanner's courtappointed guardian ad litem who were involved in Dornheim's state court custody dispute with her ex husband. Was involved in a bitter divorce and custody dispute with her ex husband. Which was forwarded to Kate Kenna. Was involved in the investigation of the second allegation of abuse which was based on a report made by a doctor at the urgent care clinic Dornheim took Tanner to when Tanner returned from his father's house with facial bruising. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/04/061693P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction on Count V. I. The background of this case and Kenyon's first trial are described in our prior opinion. When A.L. was between the ages of eight and eleven. She was a regular overnight guest at the home of Ronald Kenyon and his common law wife. A.L. was interviewed by a physician's assistant. We held that Kroupa's testimony was inadmissible hearsay that had improperly bolstered A.L.'s account and. Was dismissed on the motion of the government during trial. She also stated that she had not disclosed the abuse before her interview with Kroupa because she was scared of Kenyon. Repeat two comments made by A.L. that are disputed on appeal. The court determined that Kenyon's advisory guideline sentencing range was 324 to 405 months' imprisonment. Expert testimony that he says was received without proper notice or a required hearing on reliability. When she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june97/96-6400.opa.html">D.W. V. ROGERS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>D.W. v. <a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="555"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june97/96-6400.opa.html">D.W. V. ROGERS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>D.W. v. <a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7DA09472925E6A2A88256DC0005504B4/$file/0150461.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is whether the district court clearly erred in finding that her consent was voluntary. Soriano challenges the sentence he was given on the ground that the district court erred in calculating the appropriate loss amount for sentencing purposes. Officers from the Los Angeles Police Department ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0237p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A pedestrian who was struck and killed by a truck. No. 02 1728 The tragic facts of this case are not in dispute. Terry Cartwright was walking on the foggy. Saw him on the side of the road while they were riding in their patrol car to the Speedy Q convenience store for a prisoner pickup. The officers stopped and asked Cartwright where he was going. Cartwright said he was traveling to Yale. Cartwright was run over by a truck and killed as he lay in the middle of 26 Mile Road. The autopsy report determined that Cartwright's blood alcohol level at the time of his death was .27 percent. A forensic pathologist determined that Cartwright's blood alcohol level at about 12:15 a.m. would have been in excess of .30 percent. Cartwright's speech would have been slurred. His eyes would have been red. He would have had trouble standing. That the City is liable for failure to train and supervise its police officers. Is appealable under 28 U.S.C. з 1291. The district court denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment based on its conclusion that there were genuine issues of material fact for trial. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D1A8F80C8F439B2988256E530077DAA2/$file/0150461.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Are amended as follows: The opinion is amended by adding a new footnote 4. At this stage we are not inclined to redraft our majority opinion to respond in a more comprehensive fashion. Instead will simply state that we disagree with her analysis. The dissent incorrectly asserts that there was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/aug96/95-2092.wpd.html">GARRAMONE V. ROMO<BR></A><BR> Jeri Garramone was a reservist in the United States Army. When Garramone was sent overseas. While Garramone was still overseas. The two children were temporarily placed in a foster home. She was not represented by counsel at either hearing. Arguing that the district court erred in (1) finding that defendants Romo and Sanchez were not entitled to qualified immunity with regard to the procedural due process and SSCRA claims. Discussion We begin by evaluating Romo's and Sanchez's contention that they are entitled to qualified immunity on Garramone's procedural due process and SSCRA claims. Then we decide whether that right was clearly established such that a reasonable person in the defendant's position would have known that her conduct violated the right. Litigants have a presumed right to counsel when they could lose their physical liberty if they lose the litigation. In proceedings where litigants are not directly threatened by a loss of physical liberty. When another liberty interest is threatened. The private interest that will be affected by the official action. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="553"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/84676446CACBD1AE882572D4007F85C3/$file/0550585.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Title 18 U.S.C. з 5033 of the Juvenile Delinquency Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul1998/98a1899p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The issue on appeal is whether a board of education exceeded its authority by implementing a consensual program to distribute condoms in public schools in order to prevent disease. We will affirm. HIV infection are epidemic among school age youth . . . . Have an obligation to promote a healthy lifestyle for all adolescents. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="550"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/07/01-5098.htm">01-5098 -- DUBBS V. HEAD START INC. -- 07/21/2003<BR></A><BR> Complain that their children were subjected to intrusive physical examinations. Including reconsideration of the assessment of costs against the parents. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="548"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2108.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Patrisha Jones seeks redress under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for alleged violations of her Fourth Amendment rights arising from her seizure by two New Mexico government officials at the Bernalillo High School where Jones was a student. The law was not clearly established at the time of the incident. Jones' mother and father are not married and have been estranged for some time. She was sixteen years old at the time. Because her father is a former police officer and her stepmother is a friend of the county sheriff. Jones was reluctant to report the incident. Was dispatched to the school. Jones' father was not aware that Jones was living with her mother until receiving the TRO. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="548"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/May2003/023943p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from an order of the district court denying Wim Delvoye's petition to return Baby S to Belgium under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. 19 I.L.M. 1501 (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="546"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/961409P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have reproduced the caption here exactly as it appears in the petition which initiated this proceeding in the District Court. This is a privately initiated action. We are aware of no authority that permits the petitioner. To describe himself as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1123.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kesten LLP</SPAN> were on brief for appellants.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CA10C718FC122BB6882570B5005C00E8/$file/0310437.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: John Cornelio Norris was convicted of three counts of aggravated sexual abuse. We hold that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate Norris's confession as to count two and reverse his conviction on that count. I FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Norris is a member of the Tohono O'Odham Indian Nation and resided on the San Xavier Indian Reservation during the time the events at issue occurred. He is also the victim's uncle. T.V. was five years old at the time. This occurrence was not unusual. She is referred to as T.V. Who was the victim of a prior sexual assault by Norris. Is referred to as T.V.'s sister. 1 UNITED STATES v. T.V.'s mother received a report from T.V.'s school that Norris may have sexually abused her daughter. T.V.'s mother took T.V. to the clinic where T.V. was examined by Dr. DaSilva Stephen examined T.V. and noticed that the perineum area was slightly red. DaSilva Stephen is not an expert in child sexual abuse. Because it was a very cold day and Norris had no electricity. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1624.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The claims against defendant Edward Mitchell were dismissed on the merits. As we have concluded that all claims against Kimberly Nwanko should have been dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff was awarded physical custody of his two children by a temporary decree from a New Hampshire court in April. The children were residing in Florida. After the complaint was referred to a magistrate who issued a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr96/94-9098.opa.html">HAMILTON V. CANNON<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Hamilton v. We have jurisdiction over that judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/962808P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> (3) his rights under the ex post facto clause have been violated. (4) venue in the Eastern District of Missouri is improper. Crawford argues that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support his conviction. Background The underlying facts are not in dispute. Where they have resided ever since. Crawford was indicted in the Eastern District of Missouri on one count of violating the CSRA2 from October 31. 1996.3 A warrant was issued for his arrest. Crawford was arrested in Louisiana. His initial appearance was held in United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. That the CSRA is unconstitutional under the commerce clause and the Tenth Amendment. That his rights under the ex post facto clause were being 2 The CSRA provides in pertinent parts: Whoever willfully fails to pay a past due support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). .... As used in this section (1) the term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0269n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Williams was an eligible employee of a contributing employer during 2003. Jr. was born on June 26. His parents were married on November 28. He was in custody for that crime from June 24. He was released into the community. He was assigned to a family service agency and received individual and group counseling. Jr. was taken into custody as a result of assaults against his sister's boyfriend and his suspensions from school. Escalation to a secure facility was recommended after a hearing. Jr. was placed at the Bradley Behavioral Mental Health Center ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="544"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr96/94-9098.opa.html">HAMILTON V. CANNON<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Hamilton v. We have jurisdiction over that judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="542"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept97/96-3099.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. WILLIAMS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. BACKGROUND</i><p> <p> Appellant and his wife were married in May 1979. One son (Jason) was born in September 1980. Who was born in March 1988. Appellant had graduated from Vanderbilt Medical School and was board certified in anatomic pathology. He was employed as a pathologist at Space Coast Pathology and served as the Associate Medical Examiner for Brevard County.<p> Formal separation proceedings were commenced in State Court. He also threatened to quit his job and go live in a monastery in order to insure that none of his earnings were used to pay child support. On the same day the Income Deduction Order was issued. A final divorce decree was issued on June 12. He does not believe that he will be able to make the payments </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="542"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2DA8C6954EA9C8A3882572EA00532815/$file/0516071.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Although the Rogerses' was as to liability only. Because we hold that it was clearly established that warrantless removal of children is permissible only in cases of exigency. That it would have been apparent to a reasonable social worker that no exigency existed in this case. Jr. ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="542"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2004/021284p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> It is now clear that minimal due process required notice and an opportunity to be heard. The ex parte order was unconstitutional insofar as it permitted Oscar's removal from the United States without providing Egervary with either a pre or post deprivation hearing. Because the order entered by the District Judge in the underlying ICARA proceeding was a superseding cause of Egervary's injury. We conclude that Egervary is unable to establish in this Bivens suit that the actions of the defendants in the custody proceeding proximately caused his harm. We will reverse the District Court's denial of summary judgment to Rooney. We will affirm on alternative grounds its grant of summary judgment to Nallin. Egervary is a native of Hungary. He became romantically involved with fellow Hungarian Aniko Kovacs in 1990 while she was studying in the United States. They were married in Hungary in 1991 and established their residence in New Jersey. Was born in New Jersey in July 1992. Although they were scheduled to return to the United States in early April. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="542"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept97/96-3099.opa.html">UNITED STATES V. WILLIAMS<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>United States v. BACKGROUND</i><p> <p> Appellant and his wife were married in May 1979. One son (Jason) was born in September 1980. Who was born in March 1988. Appellant had graduated from Vanderbilt Medical School and was board certified in anatomic pathology. He was employed as a pathologist at Space Coast Pathology and served as the Associate Medical Examiner for Brevard County.<p> Formal separation proceedings were commenced in State Court. He also threatened to quit his job and go live in a monastery in order to insure that none of his earnings were used to pay child support. On the same day the Income Deduction Order was issued. A final divorce decree was issued on June 12. He does not believe that he will be able to make the payments </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/06/97-2256.htm">97-2256 -- U.S. V. ERVING L. (A JUVENILE) -- 06/26/1998<BR></A><BR> (2) E.L.'s statements were not voluntarily made. This court concludes that a reasonable thirteen year old in E.L.'s position would not have believed he was in custody and that the actions of the officers were not coercive so as to render E.L.'s confession involuntary. The facts surrounding E.L.'s statements to the officers are as follows. <p> In early July 1996. They were greeted by E.L.'s father. The officers identified themselves and were invited into the home by the father. They were introduced to E.L.'s mother and to E.L. and all five sat down in the living room. <p> The officers explained they had received an accusation that E.L. sexually abused his cousin and asked for permission to talk to E.L. E.L.'s mother told him it would help to clear his conscience. <p> Agent Tanberg then explained to E.L. in English why the officers were there and that they wanted to hear his version of the story. Agent Tanberg explained to E.L. that he was not in custody and that he was not going to be arrested after their discussion no matter what he told them. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="540"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May1997/97a1597p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Poritz was the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey when this suit was instituted. Poritz resigned as Attorney General and was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New Jersey. Peter Verniero was appointed the Attorney General. Peter Verniero is automatically substituted as a party plaintiff for Deborah T. We disagree and will affirm the district court's dismissal of the complaint. Who was then eight and one half months pregnant. Was admitted to the Jersey Shore Medical Center to give birth to her child. Alexander's baby were taken only fourteen minutes prior to delivery by cesarean section. The child was stillborn.2 An autopsy was performed. A death certificate was issued showing the date of the child's birth as July 15. The birth certificate noted the child's name was Kaylyn Elissa Alexander and that she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="537"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0194p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Appears to contend that Defendants did not reasonably accommodate her disability insofar as she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="533"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2FD995D40B041A9088256E5A00707B67/$file/0015822.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because this decision was based on a correct application of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="533"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199710/95-7302a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Among the debts he sought to discharge were two resulting from his 1990 Maryland divorce. Before judgment was entered. Edwards filed a complaint in the bankruptcy court seeking a determination that both of Richardson's obligations the child support and the second mortgage assumption were nondischargeable debts </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="533"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/76F639FDB9D3DB1088256A5C0075D693/$file/0015822.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because this decision was based on a correct application of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="531"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2003/012735.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendants are New Jersey state court judges and the administrative director of the New Jersey courts.1 The District Court abstained under Younger v. We will affirm. The Honorable John T. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S 1291. 2 I Plaintiffs. Are all under child support orders issued by the Superior Court of New Jersey. They were arrested and incarcerated for civil contempt of a court order.2 Plaintiffs allege violations of their due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.3 Specifically. Plaintiffs contend they were indigent at the time of their hearings. They aver there is a great likelihood they will again be deprived of their asserted rights because in the future they will be obligated to appear in similar contempt hearings. 2. Anthony was arrested on April 19. Was released that same day after paying $125.00 toward his arrears. Pasqua was arrested on May 15. Pasqua was incarcerated until June 1. When she was released without having made any payment towards her arrearage. Tolbert was arrested on March 27. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="531"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/024693.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> There were no meritorious issues for appeal. His further review of the first issue in preparation for argument led him to conclude that it is. Bill Kise is a 63 year old pedophile who admits that he has had sexual contact with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="531"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200116723.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is constitutional as enacted by the Florida legislature and as subsequently enforced. Florida courts have defined the term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="529"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/03/041369P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He argues that his conviction is flawed because the district court allowed the prosecuting witness to testify via closed circuit television. Bordeaux was denied the opportunity to confront his accuser as provided for in the sixth amendment. Bordeaux argues that the court should overturn his conviction because he was deprived of his sixth amendment right to confront his accuser when AWH was allowed to testify via closed circuit television. The court found that AWH was afraid of the defendant and of testifying in front of the jury in the large courtroom. That the preference is a strong one and that a defendant's sixth amendment confrontation right </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="529"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1954.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Eisenhart and McFaul & Eisenhart were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellees. Warren Brown is the paternal grandfather of two minor children. No official action was taken. Allegedly because he was drunk. He was told by Department officials that he had missed appointments and no further treatment or evaluation would be offered. Was rejected and then renewed his motion. The renewed motion was denied after a hearing. A later appeal by Brown through the state appellate courts was fruitless. The district court held that the state proceedings sought to be enjoined had concluded and that the request for relief was now moot. The court also eliminated certain of the defendants primarily higher level officials on the ground that no sufficient connection between them and the events in dispute was adequately alleged. The dismissals were based on qualified immunity. The district court held that neither the reputational nor associational rights asserted by Warren Brown were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/03/00-5166.htm">00-5166 -- FOUST V. STATE OF OKLAHOMA -- 03/21/2001<BR></A><BR> The claims he asserts are based on state court rulings in Tulsa County. The district court dismissed petitioner's amended petition because the minor child was not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/03/99-5087.htm">99-5087 -- RANSOM V. WAGONER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -- 03/21/2000<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiffs Lisa Ransom and her daughter Amber Ransom filed this action under 42 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2062.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> An excessive force claim is subsumed in an unlawful arrest claim. We reject the notion that an excessive force claim is subsumed in an unlawful arrest claim in the facts presented by this case. These Defendants' motions for partial summary judgment were denied without prejudice pending further discovery. Covington were dispatched to Plaintiffs' residence. Rick Cortez was asleep when he was suddenly awakened by noises and lights in his fenced (1) Plaintiff Rick Cortez is actually the husband of the babysitter Tina Cortez. <hr> back yard. He repeatedly inquired what was going on. Placed him in the back of a patrol car where he was subjected to questioning. Tina Cortez was awakened by her husband as he got out of bed. The officer placed her in a separate patrol car where she was subjected to questioning. Miranda warnings are required for custodial interrogation occasioned by an arrest. Rick Cortez also informed the officers that his handcuffs were too tight and caused excessive pain. Despite his declaration and the fact that Rick Cortez supposedly was not under arrest. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="527"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1904.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellees.</SPAN></P> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/061122np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Curvan Wayne Gilkes (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="522"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar2001/003195.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The primary issue raised by this appeal is whether Centre County violated the appellants' civil rights by excluding them from participation in the County's foster care program because their son has HIV and AIDS. Names have been changed to preserve confidentiality. 3 Foster Child Program. County officials responded by adopting a policy providing that foster families whose members have </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="520"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-3318.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This suit is about a foster care placement. The plaintiffs are five of six siblings who were placed with the family. They have sued several officials of the Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) in their individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. з 1983. Holding that the plaintiffs could not show that the state 2 No. 01 3318 knew or suspected that the foster parents were probable child abusers. That such a showing was necessary for liability. While we are sympathetic to the unfortunate history of these individuals. Were minors at the time of the relevant events. Defendant Eloise Anderson was the Administrator of the Division of Community Services at DHSS. Defendants Sandra Stolle and April Lancour were social workers for DHSS. They were supervised by defendant Shirley Bohle. Derwin and Rebecca Lewis were the heads of a family that included one biological child and one foster child. The Lewises were considering adopting more children. Which was completed in 1989. As the children were Native Americans. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="520"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313639op2.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: This case is before us on remand from the Supreme Court with instructions to reconsider our panel decision. We have determined that. I. Alvin Smith was convicted of one count of producing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. з 2251(a)1 and one count of possessing child pornography Section 2251(a) provides: Any person who employs. Shall be punished . . . if such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed. If that visual depiction was produced using materials that have been mailed. 2 and was sentenced to a total of 188 months in prison and 60 months of supervised release. The physical evidence used against Smith was discovered pursuant to a search warrant executed at Smith's mother's home in Tampa. Smith was incarcerated and the target of the investigation was his brother. Who lived at the residence and was suspected of involvement in drug trafficking. The focus of the warrant was drugs and drug paraphernalia. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F02F41B75661514B88256EEB0078903F/$file/0315687.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The judgments provided that Gaudin would have sole custody of the children. Any decision would be subject to the determination of a court of competent jurisdiction in the country in which the Mother and the Child are residing. The ensuing arrangement was that the children lived with Gaudin in Quebec for most of the year and visited Remis in Hawaii for several weeks each summer. The children were in Hawaii on the summer visit allowed under the stipulated judgments. That there was a grave risk that the children would be psychologically harmed if they were returned to their mother. Gaudin amended her motion in Quebec Superior Court to request an attestation that Remis's retention of the children was wrongful under the Hague Convention. The court agreed with the Canadian court's determination that Remis's retention of his children was wrongful under the GAUDIN v. Because the children's habitual residence was Canada and the retention was not permitted under the July 1994 Hawaii Family Court judgments recognized in Canada in August 2000. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="518"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1421.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jessup & Green was on brief for Gary Yesser with whom Yesser. Jessup & Green was on brief for appellant. appellant. Inc. was on Raymond A. Inc. was on brief for appellee. brief for appellee. Of the Second Circuit. Was not a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="516"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0813n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Authorities discovered that images of child pornography were being posted on the Internet from an account under the name of David L. The CDs also contained 144 images that had been downloaded from the The </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="516"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062176np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident on or about September 28. 1989 when Leslie was 12 years old. Leslie is removable under Immigration & Nationality Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="516"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199902/98-3080b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were David G. With them on the brief were Laura S. Owen moved in the district court to dismiss an indictment charging tax evasion and related crimes on the ground that the indictment was beyond the prosecutorial jurisdiction of Independent Counsel Kenneth W. It gave Indepen dent Counsel Starr jurisdiction to investigate whether any individuals or entities have committed a violation of any federal criminal law. Who are reasonably believed to have committed a violation of any federal criminal law arising out of such matters. Including persons or entities who have engaged in an unlawful conspiracy or who have aided or abetted any federal offense. The Special Division ordered that the Independent Counsel have prosecutorial jurisdiction to fully investigate and prose cute the subject matter with respect to which the Attor ney General requested the appointment of independent counsel. These grants of authority were under 28 U.S.C. s 593(b)(1). Secret Service records indicate that James Riady had made several visits to the White House in the days before the payment to Hubbell was made. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="516"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0342p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Skeeter was sworn in as a police officer on September 3. Skeeter was not told to target any particular individuals. Rather was directed to go out into the Circleville community. Cherrington was told to pack a bag. That this request was refused. Cherrington and Daija were taken from the motel and placed in a police car. Cherrington was taken to the Circleville police department for processing and placed in a cell. Her daughter Daija was released to a friend. Merely pretended to do so. 1 The local courts were closed on Monday. No. 01 3637 Cherrington was arraigned on drug trafficking charges. The Standards Governing This Appeal This case is on appeal from the District Court's grant of summary judgment to Defendants. B. The Individual Defendants Are Protected by Qualified Immunity Against the з 1983 Claims Asserted by Daija King. Argued that they were shielded from liability under 42 U.S.C. з 1983 by the doctrine of qualified immunity. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="514"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3310.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The amended opinion is attached to this order. The petition for rehearing is denied. The petition for rehearing en banc was transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service. That petition is also denied. Other individuals to notify the state government whenever they have </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="511"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/07/953097P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Louis We will affirm the Community College. There is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 1995). (1986). Central to this action is a dispute between Zakrzewski and his exwife over Zakrzewski's court decreed visitation rights with his son. The particular Tuesday through Sunday period was left to the parties to work While Zakrzewski was out of town with his work. Zakrzewski is an over the road truck driver and Monday did not learn that his son was at his parents' home until Friday of that He shortened his trip and returned home late Saturday night. was the Memorial Day holiday. It was also his holiday to have the boy. The next day was Tuesday. Sheriff Fox then called Zakrzewski with a warning to return the Zakrzewski went to the sheriff's child as the ex wife demanded or face a felony charge with the potential for a three to five year prison term. office to protest the sheriff's demand and was told to deliver his son by 4:00 p.m. that day to the designated third person who would then. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="511"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTEyMTktY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-1219-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The only payment received was an involuntary garnishment of her wages in mid March of 1998. She applied for and was issued by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles a Florida only driver's license. Although there is some evidence that Venturella returned to New York on various occasions while she lived in Florida. Or is greater than $5. Or is greater than $5. That definition has no reference to an intent to remain permanently or indefinitely and would have simply required the jury to determine whether Venturella had her </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="509"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1224.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.C. was on brief for appellants. Evans and Evans & Hermann were on brief for appellees Janet Seymour and Roland Smith. The mother and grandparents of two minor children brought this action in the district court under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and state law against a social worker and two psychologists who were involved in the State of New Hampshire's investigation into reports that the children had been sexually abused. Is forbidden. Unless the proceeding is properly converted into one for summary judgment under Rule 56. Courts have made 2 narrow exceptions for documents the authenticity of which are not disputed by the parties. All or most of the above mentioned elements are present. 48 (2d Cir. 1991) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="509"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4A656293E710C2CA88256E61007BA023/$file/0170748.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is the proper respondent. Circuit Judge: Jose Flores Chavez was fifteen years old when the Immigration and Naturalization Service ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="509"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-2525.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Although Batista concedes that he is removable based on a drug trafficking conviction. He contends that he is entitled to relief from removal because his father. Was his custodial parent. Hence he is a derived United States citizen. We find that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding Cesar Batista's nationality and transfer this case to the district court for a new hearing on the matter.</FONT></P> <P ALIGN= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="507"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B9144E5C8EFBF07488256F1500754569/$file/0256648.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The defendants appellees are Albert Ruegg. Who are federal Bureau of Alcohol. Was released on parole on February 20. Was rearrested on February 3. While Jamerson was in custody. Jamerson's last known residence was on the list. The officers admit they had no reasonable suspicion to believe that Jamerson was involved in any crime. They were simply searching parolees as a way to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511924.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> O'Keefe required visitors to identify themselves and submit </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="505"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200410325.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 15) denying Brown the right to be present and to cross examine witnesses after this Court remanded the case for construction of the record. 2 1 The facts of this tragic case are straightforward and are taken from the testimony of the trial witnesses and from the last of Brown's three confessions. Which was recorded and presented to the jury by audiotape. Was a part time postmistress in the small town of Fleming. She was working in the Fleming Post Office on the morning of November 30. When she was stabbed to death. Was working in the Post Office with Gaglia between 8:00 a.m. and about 9:30 or 9:45 a.m. that day. As he was exiting the Post Office. Washington heard the man say his name was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/972504.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Roush's amended complaint alleged that the defendants unconstitutionally deprived him of his property without due process of law by improperly garnishing his wages.2 Roush appeals from the district 1 The Child Advocate Office was later renamed the Child Support Enforcement Division. Code зз 48A 5 1 to 9 (1996 & Supp. 1997) is unconstitutional to the extent that it allows the garnishment of a West Virginia resident's wages. Alleged that Robin Wayne and Connie Dunlap were inadequately trained and supervised by Karen Basham and Betty Justice. 2 court's revised memorandum opinion and order granting summary judgment for the defendants. Summary judgment is appropriate </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E5B559A39FCC729288256E5A00707BB0/$file/0050306.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have clarified the meaning of з 5033. We have explained that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ED5506F1E317209F88256A72007C849E/$file/0050306.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have clarified the meaning of з 5033. We have explained that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/08/01-1010.htm">01-1010 -- RUIZ V. MCDONNELL -- 08/08/2002<BR></A><BR> Tender Heart was a private. Which was owned by Charles Gallegos's parents. Renee Gallegos later pleaded guilty to felony child abuse charges in connection with J.R.'s death and is now imprisoned for that crime. <p> Tender Heart. Was licensed as a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971853A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which requires that a minor who decides to have an abortion inform one of her parents twenty four 2 hours prior to performance of the procedure. Only hours before this law was to become effective. Is facially constitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. A contrary holding that the People of Virginia are forbidden by the Constitution of the United States from requiring that the responsible mother and father of a pregnant teenage daughter even be told of the life defining decision their own daughter confronts we are convinced. Of will. The Act was to become effective at 12:01 Tuesday morning. The Act is a parental notice statute. Notice of the anticipated abortion is provided to one of the minor's parents. In circumstances in which either an abortion is immediately necessary to prevent the 3 mother's death or there is insufficient time to permit notification without exposing the minor to serious health risk. Authorization of an abortion without parental notification for a minor who shows that she is mature and capable of giving informed consent. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="503"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/12/022496P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Robert Silverman appeals the district court's ruling that his children were not habitual residents of Israel at the time their mother brought them to the United States and that. Even if they were. The issues before us are whether the district court (1) improperly determined that the Silverman children's habitual residence is the United States. The official history and commentary in the Federal Register explains that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="501"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA2LTM1MThfc28ucGRm/06-3518_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="501"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/95-6227.opa.html">FOY V. HOLSTON<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Foy v. Circuit Judge:<p> <p> The issue in this interlocutory appeal is whether certain Alabama officials are entitled to qualified immunity for their acts involving the Holyland. Because Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that a defendant violated clearly established federal law. We remand for further proceedings on claims which are not foreclosed by the granting of qualified immunity.<p> I. Facts<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="501"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0796n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jacobson's custody rights over her minor daughter were terminated following a trial in the Summit County Juvenile Court in June 2002. Jacobson was not capable of providing proper care for Jessica. Who was born with several physical deformities requiring numerous surgeries and extended hospital stays. The Board's position was buttressed by allegations that Ms. The decision of the juvenile court was affirmed in December 2002 by Ohio's Ninth Judicial District Court of Appeals. This motion was denied. Jacobson's appeal to the Ninth Judicial District Court of Appeals on the Rule 60(b) issue was similarly unavailing. Claiming that her daughter was being unlawfully detained because she was not given a fair hearing at the permanent custody trial. Arguing that habeas corpus was not available as a remedy. The district court granted the motion on two grounds: (1) because federal habeas jurisdiction is not available to review state court custody determinations. (2) because federal habeas relief is not available when. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-5.gif" ALT="501"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept96/95-6227.opa.html">FOY V. HOLSTON<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Foy v. Circuit Judge:<p> <p> The issue in this interlocutory appeal is whether certain Alabama officials are entitled to qualified immunity for their acts involving the Holyland. Because Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that a defendant violated clearly established federal law. We remand for further proceedings on claims which are not foreclosed by the granting of qualified immunity.<p> I. Facts<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="498"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTA5NzEtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0971-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Defendant was sentenced to 262 months imprisonment for each count. Circuit Judge: Defendant Stefan Irving (defendant or appellant) was convicted. Only arose from defendant's trips to Mexico and Honduras. of the travel to Mexico and its purpose was strong. the proof of travel to Honduras was established. It is a well established principle that a conviction in criminal law must stand on firmer ground than an uncorroborated admission by defendant. Because proof of defendant's purpose for the trip on the charged offenses was insufficient. Facts Defendant is a former chief pediatrician for the Middletown. He was convicted of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree of a seven year old boy that resulted in the revocation of his license to practice medicine in New York. A guest house that served as a place where men from the United States could have sexual relations with Mexican boys. Seven or eight boys ranging in age from eight to 20 years old were residing there. This witness stated that he saw </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="496"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTA5NzEtY3JfcmV2X29wbi5wZGY=/04-0971-cr_rev_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Rehearing is granted. The majority opinion and the concurring and dissenting opinion are withdrawn. Defendant's convictions on counts two and three previously vacated are now affirmed in the revised opinion issued herewith. Defendant was sentenced to 262 months imprisonment for each count. That vacated two counts upon which defendant Stefan Irving was convicted. is granted. Irving's convictions on counts two and three previously vacated are now affirmed in the revised opinion that follows. We remand for consideration of whether resentencing is warranted under United States v. BACKGROUND Defendant is a former chief pediatrician for the Middletown. He was convicted of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree of a seven year old boy that resulted in the revocation of his license to practice medicine in New York. A guest house that served as a place 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 where men from the United States could have sexual relations with Mexican boys. Seven or eight boys ranging in age from eight to 20 years old were residing there. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="496"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug96/95-3346.opa.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>In re Strickland United States Court of Appeals. The district court found the debt nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C.
	OPINION/ORDER I. Robert was a victim of sexual abuse. These claims are not before us in this appeal. 2 molested his younger brother. When Robert was 13. A
	OPINION/ORDER This is a child rape case where the only evidence sufficient to sustain a conviction was a jury determination that the complaining witness was more credible than the defendant. We conclude that the defendant's 1 The prosecutor's entire closing argument is attached as an appendix to this opinion. 1 No. 03 3166 Hodge v. Hurley Page 2 trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective in failing to object to this misconduct. That the state court's determination to the contrary was an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. Factual Background Petitioner Appellant Demarkus Hodge (
	00-4170 -- U.S. V. PEARL -- 04/09/2003 Circuit Judge.
	OPINION/ORDER Although they were not parties to the Ballingers' custody proceedings. The case was transferred to Arapahoe County. The case was transferred to Morgan County. That Ballinger's child support case was closed. 800 in child support and that the next payment was due in November. Ballinger alleged that his rights were violated by the state court proceedings and the individual defendants' acts under color of state law concerning his son's custody. (2) that Ballinger's claims were barred both by the applicable statute of limitations and by the Rooker Feldman doctrine. (3) that defendants Culotta and Bailey were entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. The district court found that Ballinger's claims were time barred. Applying the same standards as were employed by the district court. Ballinger contends that the district court erred in determining that his claims were time barred. We will pass Ballinger's contention that his claims are not time barred and instead affirm the district court's order on the alternative ground that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider Ballinger's з 1983 action because it in effect constitutes a challenge to a state court decision.
	97-4138 -- U.S. V. RITH -- 01/19/1999 (2) all incriminating statements should have been suppressed because they were involuntary. He was in custody for purposes of Miranda. (3) his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was violated by the admission of a certificate showing nonregistration in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. (4) the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction. Background Officer Mikkel Roe of the West Valley Police Department was dispatched to a residence in West Valley City. Officer Roe was informed en route that Sam Rith and his wife were concerned about firearms they had seen their son carry into their home. The address to which Officer Roe was dispatched was the residence of friends of the Riths. Fearful of guns and afraid that their son was involved in a gang. The Riths requested that Officer Roe check the home and ascertain if the guns were stolen. He gave the officers a house key so that no damage would be done to the house in the event they were not otherwise allowed entry.
	02-5035 -- LEONOFF V. STATE OF OKLAHOMA -- 03/14/2003 The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
	OPINION/ORDER This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > In re Strickland United States Court of Appeals. The district court found the debt nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C.
	OPINION/ORDER Sandra Lewis and Marva Rountree J u d g e C h e r to f f h e a r d o r a l a r g u m e n t in th is c a s e b u t r e s ig n e d p r io r to th e tim e th e o p in io n w a s f ile d . T h e o p in io n is f ile d b y a q u o r u m o f th e p a n e l. 2 8 U .S .C . з з 4 6 ( d ) . 2 * PHILIP B. We will affirm. I. FACTS Mary Barksdale is a 76 year old widow who lives in Philadelphia. The Women's Christian Alliance (
	RAYBURN V. HOGUE (2/16/2001, NO. 99-14729) Circuit Judge:
	RAYBURN V. HOGUE (2/16/2001, NO. 99-14729) Circuit Judge:
	OPINION/ORDER The first time that Mark Dean Schwab sexually assaulted a young male was in the fall of 1986. When Schwab was seventeen years old. His victim was a younger. Which is all we will use. Was Warren. As Warren was again walking to school. Was a thirteen year old boy (between 5'3
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The Nevins claim that defendants by their actions with respect to the custody of Renee have violated the U.S. The Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court for Fairfax County entered an order finding that Renee and Susan were
	OPINION/ORDER I. Schaal was arrested in 1987 for the rape of his former girlfriend's seven year old daughter and charged with one count of rape of a child under section 566.030 of the Missouri Revised Statutes. The visual and aural recording of a verbal or nonverbal statement of a child when under the age of twelve who is alleged to be a victim of an offense under the provisions of chapter 565 [Offenses Against the Person]. Is admissible into evidence if: (1) No attorney for either party was present when the statement was made. (2) The recording is both visual and aural and is recorded on film or videotape or by other electronic means. (3) The recording equipment was capable of making an accurate recording. The operator of the equipment was competent. The recording is accurate and has not been altered. (4) The statement was not made in response to questioning calculated to lead the child to make a particular statement or to act in a 23 videotaped statements of child victims under the age of twelve involved in statutorily identified offenses after the trial court finds the tape meets certain requirements.
	OPINION/ORDER The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. We conclude that we have appellate jurisdiction over that part of this interlocutory appeal. That we do not have appellate jurisdiction to review the district court's rulings with regard to defendants' Rooker Feldman and collateral estoppel defenses. I. Plaintiff Angela Suasnavas (Suasnavas) is the natural mother of Shari Kay Phillips (Phillips). Plaintiffs Margaret Luethje and Arnold Luethje (the Luethjes) are married. They are Suasnavas's mother and step father. Plaintiff Evie Burris (Burris) is Suasnavas's half sister. She is the daughter of Margaret Luethje and Arnold Luethje. The Luethjes are the natural grandparents of Burris's children. Jones are or were child welfare social workers employed by the Oklahoma Department of Human Services. Plaintiffs filed a civil rights action against defendants under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Defendants: (1) falsely accused Arnold Luethje of having sexually molested Suasnavas when she was a child.
	OPINION/ORDER Is withdrawn and replaced with the attached dissent. FBI Special Agent David Bowdich was assigned to investigate a series of bank robberies that UNITED STATES v. Bowdich received information from an unnamed source that a person known as
	03-6011 -- U.S. V. DREWRY -- 04/28/2004 Circuit Judge.
	00-6244 -- REVILLA V. GIBSON -- 03/13/2002 We conclude Revilla is not entitled to habeas relief. This appeal is dismissed pursuant to 28 . As follows: Appellant was convicted of the child abuse murder of thirteen (13) month old Mark Gomez. Was left alone at the house shared by Appellant and McElmurry. Yelling that he had swallowed his tongue and was not breathing. Subsequent attempts by hospital medical personnel were unsuccessful in reviving the unconscious infant. The decedent was pale and appeared not to be breathing. The OCCA specifically held the evidence
	OPINION/ORDER For which he was sentenced to 40 consecutive life sentences. Valentine was convicted of 20
	OPINION/ORDER Was charged with aggravated sexual abuse. He was convicted by the jury and sentenced to 25 years and 10 months (262 months) in prison. The defendant was also fined $4. The record is not properly preserved. Was harmless. Central to our conclusion is the fact that the defendant put his own character in issue. The baby's thigh bone and one leg were injured. Was seriously torn. The case was hotly contested at trial and could have gone either way. There was unquestionably evidence from which a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Most of the medical testimony at trial was to the effect that it was extremely unlikely that all of the baby's injuries could have been caused by the car. At least one sperm cell was found in material taken from M.M.B.'s person. The issues we have found most difficult have to do with defendant's claim that the District Court allowed a number of irrelevant and prejudicial items of evidence to be introduced against him. Testified for the defense that Bruguier was a good father and that she had never known him to discipline the children physically or to abuse them sexually.
	OPINION/ORDER He argues that the district court should have entered judgment as a matter of law in his favor with respect to the existence of a liberty interest. Deputy Kofka argues that the district court should have granted his motion for a new trial because it erroneously failed to give a jury instruction that he requested. Swipies had a protected liberty interest that was violated. That Deputy Kofka's jury instruction was properly refused. Swipies is not entitled to punitive damages. I Deputy Kofka was serving warrants when he saw Kendra Swipies. Swipies because he was a friend of Kendra's mother. Deputy Kofka argues that the district court should have entered judgment as a matter of law in his favor with regard to the due process claim because he did not infringe on a constitutionally protected liberty interest. Swipies's 2 procedural due process claim is that he was deprived of a post removal hearing because Deputy Kofka did not follow the procedures outlined in Iowa Code з 232.79. Judgment as a matter of law is appropriate when
	OPINION/ORDER Acting as de facto parents to grandchildren who are dependents of the juvenile court. Have a substantive due process right to family integrity and association with those grandchildren. Charles and Patricia Miller are grandparents of three young girls who had been removed from their natural parents because of neglect. Concluding that the Millers have no constitutional right to visit their grandchildren when the children are dependents of the juvenile court. As we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291 and no other issue merits reversal. I The Millers' grandchildren were removed from their parThe complaint names the State of California as well as Yuba County CPS employees Mike Noda. We will refer to the Yuba County parties collectively as Yuba County. The three girls were declared dependents of the Yuba County Juvenile Court on June 21. Were placed with the Millers. The mother left California in November 1994 and reunification services for her were terminated June 22. A March 1996 petition for return of the children was denied.
	01-1213 -- U.S. V. FABIANO -- 07/18/2002 The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Defendant appellant John Fabiano appeals the district court's decision to deny him relief pursuant to his motion to vacate. Fabiano was convicted of two counts of knowingly receiving visual depictions of child pornography. He was sentenced to twenty four months' imprisonment followed by three years' supervised release. His convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. United States v.
	OPINION/ORDER Branch were on brief. Leach was on brief. The suit asserted violations of Jason's constitutional rights and pendent state law claims arising out of his temporary detention under New Hampshire's protective custody statutes. That detention occurred when Jason and a friend were picked up by Officer McClellan during the early morning hours of September 12. Jason and his friend were taken to the police station. Jason was brought home. Jason's spine was injured. Were responsible for Jason's injuries. That Officer McClellan
	OPINION/ORDER A.M. was physically assaulted by other juvenile residents 2 on numerous occasions. States that A.M . was hit on the back of the head with a ping pong paddle thrown by another resident. A.M. was taken to the hospital for treatment. Other incident reports were completed by the Center's child care workers on an almost daily basis between August 2 and August 16. A.M . was thirteen years old. We will use the same designation. 2 2 1 OPINION OF THE COURT LAY. Alleging they violated his substantive due process rights by failing to protect him from harm while he was detained at the Center. The District Court's order granting summary judgment will be reversed in part and affirmed in part. A.M. was arrested in Lake Township. He was taken to the Center. Was seeing a psychiatrist in the community. The Center's administrators and supervisors were made aware of these facts upon A.M.'s admission to the Center or shortly thereafter. A.M.'s mental and behavioral problems were reflected in his behavior at the Center. A psychiatric evaluation was performed on A.M. by Dr.
	OPINION/ORDER Argued the cause and was on the briefs for the appellant. Was on the brief. The cited provisions are part of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996. Including computers and related hardware and software
	OPINION/ORDER This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief for appellees City of Springfield. Was on brief for appellee Michael Somers. * Of the District of Massachusetts. Murray was advised of the availability of a detoxification center and he expressed his desire to be taken to the center. Since no beds were available there. He remained at the Springfield police station and was placed in the protective custody lock up. Officers Michael Somers and John Lynch were in charge of booking Mr. To have slurred speech and to be indifferent to the booking procedure. These guidelines and procedures were disseminated to every officer of the Springfield police department by order of the Springfield police Chief. They were also posted in the booking area.1 During the protective custody booking process. Murray was placed in cell number 34. Routinely checked every thirty minutes.2 He was the only person held in that aisle of cells. An incapacitated person held in protective custody at the police station shall have the following property taken from him for safekeeping in accordance with departmental procedures: a. belts.
	OPINION/ORDER Arguing that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his convictions. That hearsay statements were improperly admitted. That his constitutional right to confrontation was violated. At that time T.P. was three years old. N.P. was two. The children were placed in the Spotted Tail Crisis Center. Peneaux was indicted on four counts of aggravated sexual abuse of a child under the age of twelve. Her testimony was inconsistent. When she was asked to identify the areas she had marked. Without objection the diagrams were received into evidence as exhibits. T.P. was also asked how she received the burn mark on her 2 stomach. Was asked about statements she had made to the FBI and whether she had disclosed that T.P. told her
	OPINION/ORDER This is an interlocutory appeal1 from a discovery order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in a suit presenting claims arising under 42 U.S.C. To which are annexed a variety of pendent state law claims. The information at the center of the present discovery dispute is information in the possession of LCCYS and KidsPeace concerning defendant Bruce Miller. Who was a foster child under the supervision of LCCYS and KidsPeace in December of 1993. LCCYS and KidsPeace have resisted plaintiff 's discovery requests on the grounds that such discovery would violate the confidentiality of that information in breach of an array of Pennsylvania statutes. Because interlocutory appeals are not normally permitted. A discussion of the basis of our appellate jurisdiction is necessary. Miller's release was sufficient to waive the bulk of the protections afforded by the Pennsylvania statutes. As those statutes were interpreted by the District Court. Discovery disputes in federal courts are governed by federal law.
	OPINION/ORDER One of the essential principles inherent in a multi layered judicial system is the requirement to adhere to legal decisions pronounced by the highest court: in the case of the federal courts. That is the Supreme Court of the United States. Those decisions are supported by sound reasoning. Lower federal courts generally have no difficulty in applying the precedent. The factual situation in which the principle is tested is heartrending. This is one such case.1 I. Schiller) because it is accurate and requires no elaboration. Were
	OPINION/ORDER We further hold that the district court correctly concluded that Stephens is required to pay part of the restitution award to the State of UNITED STATES v. We hold that payment should be made by Stephens to the State of Georgia only after the amount owed to the child's mother under the order is paid in full. The United States brought this criminal action to enforce Stephens's obligation to make the payments and to recover past payments that were still owing. Stephens was charged with one count of Failure to Pay Legal Child Support Obligation in violation of 18 U.S.C. з 228(a)(3). A superseding information was filed on January 23. The information further contained allegations that the amount due was in excess of $5. 395 was principal. Representing the amount of public assistance the State had paid to Garcia to support Joshua during the period Stephens was in default. Or is greater than $5. A
	SMITH V. SIEGELMAN (2/28/2003, NO. 02-10005) Circuit Judge:
	98-1135 -- U.S. V. DUVALL -- 02/24/1999 1001.
	OPINION/ORDER The issue presented is whether the taint from a temporary detention was sufficiently attenuated that Defendant's subsequent incriminating statements are admissible in evidence. We hold that it was. Was babysitting three monthold infant Braydon Grover on the morning of August 6. Braydon's mother was stationed at Fort Campbell. Paramedics were dispatched to the scene. Where he was pronounced dead.
	OPINION/ORDER Recognizing that the plaintiffs were no longer minors. The court removed the language in the caption reflecting that the plaintiffs' mother was acting as their representative. The defendants were the DHS. Terry B. was six years old. John B. was five years old. The placement was indeed foster care. The aunt and uncle had earlier declared bankruptcy and thus were not defendants at the time of trial. The children were sent to an inpatient psychiatric facility. While the children were hospitalized. The children's first argument is that because they were minors in the custody of the DHS for the purpose of placement in foster care. There is at least one insuperable barrier to this argument. That is that the children admitted in the trial court that the DHS lost. Even if we were to do so. Were to hold. There is no evidence that the children suffered any abusive treatment before that time. Any affirmative duty of protection that the state might have had because it had custody of the children therefore ended before any actionable injury occurred.
	OPINION/ORDER This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >
	SMITH V. SIEGELMAN (2/28/2003, NO. 02-10005) Circuit Judge:
	96-6339 -- BRIGDEN V. OKLAHOMA -- 10/29/1997 Was stabbed to death in his cell at the Oklahoma State Reformatory (OSR) by another inmate on June 12. Were deliberately indifferent to the danger of physical harm to Mr. Brigden was convicted in Woods County. Of eight counts of lewd molestation and one count of rape by instrumentation and was sentenced to 60 years' imprisonment. The next morning he was attacked in the prison yard by other inmates apparently because of the nature of his crime. He then requested and was placed in protective custody. Planning in this regard was detailed. We would have approximately 27 beds for growth. They were all housed at the Penitentiary. We decided to give the inmates at OSR the option to come off protection. There is belief that many of the inmates will choose to remain at OSR. Our plan is to move the protection unit off of F 4 at the Penitentiary and place all protective custody inmates on D and E Units. Which will provide 160 beds. F 4 would then be used for general housing. The movement from the F Cellhouse would assist us in better utilizing the current vacant beds that are on the protection unit.
	98-3077 -- U.S. V. CAREY -- 04/14/1999 Carey was charged with one count of possessing a computer hard drive that contained three or more images of child pornography produced with materials shipped in interstate commerce. See 18 U.S.C.
	98-3248 -- JOSHUA W. V. USD 259 BOARD OF EDUCATION -- 05/02/2000 The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. I. Background Plaintiffs Joshua W. and his mother Anita O. brought this action in 1997 . We have jurisdiction under 28 . Evaluating
	03-3058 -- CLARDY V. MCKUNE -- 03/02/2004 The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Petitioner appellant Thomas J. Clardy asserts (1) that the Kansas state court erred in denying him access to records to prove that the child's mother was about to lose custody and had a motive to fabricate the story of sexual abuse because she saw Mr. . (2) that the Kansas state court erred in ruling that evidence that the child was undergoing counseling for previous sexual abuse. Which might have accounted for her knowledge of a type of sexual activity. Was barred by application of the state's rape shield law. On appeal in federal court. Clardy's second argument as presented in his brief on appeal would have a constitutional dimension. We hold that Clardy's argument is without merit. We affirm the district court's denial of a writ of habeas corpus.
	OPINION/ORDER He died before the opinion was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel. Alleging that the Defendants are liable for her son's death under a state created danger theory. She also alleges that Pamela Stiles is individually liable for negligence under state law. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment against Sanford. As we have noted before. The relevant question н whether a state 2 actor's behavior
	OPINION/ORDER We will deny the Petition for Review on some claims and remand to the BIA on other claims for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 3 II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Lukwago is a native and citizen of Uganda. When he was 15 years old. Lukwago stayed in a tent with other kidnapped children where they were guarded by armed rebels. Both adults and children were held captive at the camp. 342 (9th Cir. 1994) (
	00-8002 -- E.F.W. V. ST. STEPHEN'S INDIAN HIGH SCHOOL -- 09/11/2001 Concluding that these defendants were protected by sovereign immunity. See E.F.W. v. The court further held that to the extent relief was sought against defendants Kennah and Lone Bear individually. Plaintiffs appeal and we affirm. I Background The facts in this action are essentially undisputed. Plaintiffs are enrolled members of the Northern Arapaho Tribe who live on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. Who was also a student at the high school. Was killed in an automobile accident. Fremont is a private mental health care facility that
	OPINION/ORDER Are hereby amended. The amended opinion and amended dissent are filed concurrently herewith. The Opinion and Dissent are amended as follows: 1. The petitioner must have either referenced specific provisions of the federal constitution . . . or cited to federal case law.
	OPINION/ORDER Constitution by permitting the jury to view what he contends was a highly prejudicial videotape of his interrogation. The child was sick with flu like symptoms at the time and slept most of the day. While his girlfriend was gone. Was that after his girlfriend returned and he left the apartment. Castillo was tried by jury in the State Court of Arizona for Maricopa County. MCFADDEN jury to view a videotape of the police interrogating Castillo that he argues was highly prejudicial. Which we have viewed. The detective asserted that the autopsy
	UNITED STATES V. HAMPSHIRE He was sentenced to two years' probation and ordered to pay $38. (2) the state court order upon which his federal conviction is predicated violates his rights under both the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act (
	OPINION/ORDER Brannan was on brief. Was on brief for the Appellant. Were on brief. Javier was a naturalized United States citizen who lived in his native country. This appeal results from the decision of the SSA to terminate Javier's wife's and children's benefits on the basis of blood tests demonstrating that Javier was not the children's biological father. I. Alfonso Javier was born in the Philippines on January 19. Javier was born October 25. SSA conducted a brief investigation to confirm the Javiers' claim for benefits and ascertained that Allen was living in the Javiers' custody. Javier was born September 17. An SSA field examiner determined that the child was entitled to benefits. Javier was 82 years old at the time of Felrosh Ann's birth. Javier was determined not to be the father of any of the children. Javier was eliminated as the biological mother of Allen but the tests demonstrated a 91.6 per cent probability of maternity with respect to Philip and Felrosh Ann. The results were not forwarded to the SSA until November 29.
	00-8058 -- MEYER V. DRELL -- 05/21/2001 The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Petitioner Michael Theodore Meyer appeals the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Was first placed in the physical custody of her maternal grandparents in 1992. Alleging that his daughter was being held illegally and that his . Parental rights were being violated. Because it did not show how K.D. was being restrained illegally. Petitioner filed a similar petition with the Wyoming Supreme Court which was denied on July 19. Again because it failed to show how K.D. was being held illegally or without due process of law. We have . To ensure that we have jurisdiction over petitioner's claims. See Maier v. Cir. 1997) (holding federal courts have independent duty to examine jurisdiction). Petitioner is not
	OPINION/ORDER We have reviewed this case on a previous appeal. The relevant facts are described at length in Stemler v. Black was killed in a car accident shortly after police officers allegedly removed her from Stemler's car and placed her in the truck of her boyfriend. Kritis then began to chase the women on the streets of Florence before both the car and the truck were stopped by the police after a concerned citizen alerted them to the situation. Stemler was arrested for driving under the influence. Witnesses say that all the police officers present repeated Kritis's assertion that Stemler was a lesbian to each other and to others present. Black was either escorted or carried from Stemler's car to the passenger seat of Kritis's truck. Black was partially ejected from the passengerside window. Her arm was completely severed from her body and her head was split into two parts by some part of the guardrail. 1994.1 The complaint alleged that the defendants were liable under 42 U.S.C. з 1983 for Black's wrongful death because they had displayed deliberate indifference by forcing her into Kritis's car.2 Chipman's federal claims were dismissed by the district court in 1994.
	01-1248 -- MORRIS V. BURNETT -- 02/19/2003 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
	OPINION/ORDER Is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity for these particular functions. Defendant Sheriff Peterson is responsible for the operation of the jail in Clinch County. Sheriff Peterson's deputy and chief jailer is Alan Brown. As Manders was escorted into the jail's holding cell. Manders was released from jail. The Manual also details when deadly force is justified. Are responsible for use of force policy at the jail. For ensuring that the policy is followed.3 According to Manders. Manders sought damages against Clinch County and Sheriff Peterson in his official capacity.4 The district court denied defendants' motion for summary judgment on Manders's з 1983 damage claims against Clinch County and Sheriff Peterson in his official capacity for the use of force policy at the jail and the training and The parties and the district court litigated this lawsuit against Sheriff Peterson as if all of Manders's з 1983 claims against Clinch County also were made against Sheriff Peterson in his official capacity. Claiming that he is a state actor and that the district court erred in denying him Eleventh Amendment immunity.6 This appeal does not address the individual liability of Sheriff Peterson or his deputies for using excessive force.7 Instead.
	OPINION/ORDER Under which C.K. will remain confined until his twentyfirst birthday. We have jurisdiction over his appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. We hold that the sentence imposed was both arbitrary and in direct contravention of the rehabilitative purposes of the FJDA and therefore an abuse of discretion. Factual Background C.K. is a fourteen year old member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. He was born in Montana and spent the first six years of his life on the Fort Belknap Indian reservation with his parents and other family members. C.K. attended Head Start and could read and count to 100 by the time he was three. When C.K. was around six. C.K. was referred to the Fort Belknap Health Center (
	OPINION/ORDER Were on the briefs. Spitzer were on the brief. The focus of their challenge is an order which empowers the general receiver to disregard District law to the extent that it unreasonably interferes with the discharge of her responsibilities. Because that order is too broad. The balance of the appeals are moot. Concluded that the evidence presented in the case was
	OPINION/ORDER Appellants are ten former obstetrical patients at MUSC whose urine was tested pursuant to the Policy. We will refer to the defendants collectively as
	OPINION/ORDER Were on brief. Was awarded custody of their three minor children. Lewko was ordered to pay all household expenses. The child support order was amended to $65 per week. Although the August 1997 finding was purged after Lewko made a lump sum payment. Lewko was incarcerated twelve days for contempt and ordered to pay $2. This payment was made by church members on his behalf. Lewko was ordered to appear for another contempt hearing for his ongoing failure to make support payments. Lewko reneged on this promise.
	OPINION/ORDER This case is not much about grace. It is about Grace. Grace was abandoned soon after birth to the custody of the New Mexico Children. The basis of the foster family's objection was that they thought Bogey was actually a man pretending to be a woman because of Bogey's extensive facial hair. Responsibility for her case bounced around from one over worked social worker to another and concerns about her situation were investigated by an uninquisitive investigator. Grace's situation quickly turned from muddled to tragic: she died four weeks after the adoption was finalized. Apparently as the result of being beaten to death. This case is legally about the claimed failures of the Children. Particularly during the period between placement for adoption and the time adoption decree was entered. The argument is that. The adoption would not have been permitted and Grace would not have been placed in mortal danger. His state tort claims were dismissed as a matter of law. His 1983 claims against several Department employees were dismissed on summary judgment.
	OPINION/ORDER Discriminates against him because he is adopted. Because 8 U.S.C. з 1432's treatment of adopted children is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. BACKGROUND Smart was born in Jamaica in 1982. He was adopted by Daphne and Horace McLean. Horace McLean was naturalized several months after Smart's adoption. Smart did not reside with either parent at the time each 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 was naturalized in the United States. Smart was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. He was convicted upon a guilty plea in New York state court of attempted robbery in the second degree. As that term is defined in INA з 101(a)(43)(F). Smart's sole defense to removal was that he had derived U.S. citizenship from his adoptive parents. Both of whom were naturalized before Smart's eighteenth birthday. The statutory provision under which he was claiming derivative citizenship. From achieving derivative citizenship because he was not residing with his adoptive parents in the United States at the time they were naturalized.
	OPINION/ORDER FBI Special Agent David Bowdich was assigned to investigate a series of bank robberies that occurred in San Diego in 1997 and 1998. Bowdich received information from an unnamed source that a person known as
	03-3233 -- RIOS V. COMMANDANT, UNITED STATES DISCIPLINARY BARRACKS -- 04/01/2004 Rios was convicted by general court martial of the following offenses: (1) rape of a child under the age of sixteen. He was sentenced to eighteen years' imprisonment. When Mr. Rios was charged and convicted of four additional offenses. Rios also alleges that (4) prison officials violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment by denying him outdoor exercise and
	OPINION/ORDER Which was implemented in the United States through the International Child Abduction (1) After examining the briefs and appellate record. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. Met his burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence a grave risk of harm to J.D. if the child were returned to Ms. Viger is J.D.'s father. The parties were never married and Ms. Viger was permitted to take Ms. A hearing was set for July 18. Petitioner is willing to proceed on a proffer from respondent of the facts respondent believes he can prove regarding that issue. The parties may present oral argument and written briefs at the hearing regarding the question of whether under the proffered facts the child is in
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Defendant Appellant Jeff Fowler was convicted of annoying or molesting Charla Lara in violation of California Penal Code з 647.6 following a jury trial in which he was precluded from cross examining Lara regarding two prior incidents in which she alleged that other men had molested her. We conclude that the proffered cross examination sufficiently bore upon Lara's reliability or credibility such that the jury might reasonably have questioned it and. Was not unreasonable. Prejudice was itself objectively unreasonable. Because Lara's testimony was crucial to the State's case. Was not strong. Who was then fourteen years old. Was daughter to Kelly Kenniston. There were no third party witnesses to either event. 1. He suggested that she change clothes and then entered the walk in closet while she was wearing only a bra and underpants to offer her a particular dress. As Fowler was apply FOWLER v. '
	OPINION/ORDER Andrew Galo appeals the sentence that was imposed following his conditional plea of guilty to pr oduction of material depicting the sexual exploitation of childr en. He argues that these statutes are unconstitutional per se. That those statutes are not unconstitutional as applied to Galo. We will therefore remand for resentencing. Galo was in a relationship with Sheila H. She had a young daughter whom we will refer to as Jessica H. Galo accomplished this by threatening to tell CYS that Sheila H. had previously permitted Jessica H. to have contact with him. This would have jeopar dized Sheila's custody of her daughter because Galo had a state criminal record. Sheila knew that Jessica should not have been per mitted to be in Galo's company without supervision because of Galo's background. Galo also threatened to have the utilities at Sheila H.'s residence turned off unless Jessica spent time with him. The utilities were register ed in his name. Jessica knew that Galo had a temper and she was therefore appar ently too afraid to resist or refuse.
	OPINION/ORDER Marquard argues primarily that his trial counsel was ineffective in various ways during the penalty phase of his trial. Murder of Stacey Willets Marquard was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1991 murder of his girlfriend. After Willets's remains were discovered by hunters in the woods. Marquard and codefendant Michael Abshire were arrested. Are as follows: John Marquard. During a stop in South Carolina Marquard told Abshire that he was going to kill her because he was tired of arguing with her. She was still breathing. Marquard was arrested and confessed. Marquard was convicted of first degree murder and armed robbery. Marquard contended that he was present for the murder of Stacey Willets. Testified that it was Marquard who planned to kill and ultimately did kill Willets. As follows: [STATE ATTORNEY]: Where is the first place that you stopped? [ABSHIRE]: We stopped at a . . . like a convenience store/gas station in South Carolina when the sea bags that were on the trunk fell off.
	OPINION/ORDER Michael Edward LeBrun and United States Naval Ensign Andrew Muns were shipmates aboard the U.S.S. Both men were assigned to work in the ship's disbursement office. An area where cash was kept in a safe for purposes of paying the ship's personnel. While the ship was moored in Subic Bay. Approximately $8600 was found to be missing from the disbursement office. Special Agent Hughes told LeBrun that he was conducting security clearance background investigations on people that LeBrun worked with in the military. Hughes informed LeBrun that the true purpose of the meeting was to discuss the disappearance of Muns. LeBrun was informed of his Miranda rights pursuant to Miranda v. No polygraph examination was taken that day. A four hour interview was conducted. Was again given his Miranda rights. He stated that he may have repressed memories regarding Muns' disappearance and asked Hughes if he knew of a therapist who could help him reveal the memories. No polygraph examination was administered. LeBrun was advised of his Miranda rights.
	OPINION/ORDER We will deny his petition. I. Van Riel was born out of wedlock in Jamaica on May 21. Claiming that he was removable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony and of possession of a controlled substance. Provides that a child born outside the United States automatically becomes a citizen when (1) at least one parent of the child is a citizen. (2) the child is under 18 years of age and (3) the child is residing in the United States under the custody of the citizen parent. Van Riel acknowledges that he 2 was past the age of 18 when this statute became effective on February 27. We have held that the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 does not apply retroactively. Our holding comports with the findings in other courts of appeals that the CCA is not retroactive. Van Riel is not a citizen under the Child Citizenship Act. Van Riel claims that permitting derivative nationality of children born out of wedlock only through the mother is unconstitutional. We are mindful that we engage in limited judicial inquiry regarding immigration legislation because
	OPINION/ORDER Klinzing argues first that the DPPA is an unconstitutional exercise of the federal commerce power. Pamela gained full custody of their sons and Klinzing was ordered by the court to pay child support until the boys reached adulthood. Rule 803(6) permits introduction of business records without foundation testimony from the record custodian so long as the records are authenticated according to FED. 1 punishes the willful nonpayment of past 1 For the purpose of this appeal there is no meaningful difference between the earlier CSRA and later DPPA. The sole purpose of the legislation is to assist states in recovering past due child support payments beyond their borders. (...continued) sake we will refer to the statute only as the DPPA. Since then several circuits have reconsidered the issue in light of the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Klinzing still claims that the DPPA is unconstitutional. Because we agree with our analysis in Black that an interstate child support obligation is a
	OPINION/ORDER Schriro is substituted for her predecessor. Circuit Judge: Appellant George Lopez (
	OPINION/ORDER To those individuals who are free to leave state custody. We will affirm the District Court's order denying appellants' claim to qualified immunity. I. The plaintiffs are the guardians of twenty adult individuals with mental retardation who formerly resided at Western Center. The plaintiffs were
	OPINION/ORDER I. BACKGROUND Omni is a non profit corporation that provides foster care services to wards of the State of Nebraska. If it is determined that the Contractor's practices are harmful to the child/family. Detective Miller is a police officer with the Bellevue Police Department and for the past several years has specialized in investigating child abuse cases. Charges against three of the staff members were ultimately dismissed and the fourth staff member was acquitted. The Woodlawn staff members allege that they were harassed by Miller because of their race. The NDHHS provided Omni with thirty days advance written notice that it was cancelling its contract with Woodlawn. Omni argues that Miller's investigation and arrests were discriminatory. De novo review is also applicable where summary judgment is granted on the basis of qualified immunity. Summary judgment is properly granted when. Shows that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the party moving for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
	OPINION/ORDER Was convicted by a jury of five counts of aggravated sexual abuse of his son and daughter. Was between the ages of four and six during the period over which the offenses were alleged to have occurred. Was between the ages of one and three during this time. There was no eyewitness testimony from third parties. A physical examination of M.T.B. revealed some evidence that was consistent with. Contending that three separate constitutional errors were made during his trial. That she believed that she was in a position to give an opinion as to his truthfulness or untruthfulness. She had formed an opinion that he
	OPINION/ORDER Tamimi (Sharon) were married on May 19. Abdulaziz is an employee of Saudi. Sharon was awarded custody of the two minor children and child support in the amount of $448 per month. While Sharon's divorce case was pending in the Circuit Court for Stafford County. Abdulaziz was arrested in Virginia for the criminal charge of non payment of child support to Sharon. Bail was set for $21. The case was continued until February 8. Abdulaziz was released on his own recognizance on the conditions that he remain in the United States. Saudi further pledged to
	OPINION/ORDER The plaintiffs were sexually assaulted by Barry Whetzel. A YDC employee who was working as a youth development aide at the time he committed the assaults. Whetzel was eventually convicted of criminal charges arising out of these incidents.
	OPINION/ORDER The issue before us is a limited one. The only issue is whether appellant. Such a determination is provided for lawful permanent residents charged as alien terrorists. S 1226(c) (2001). 1 The petition is directed to Charles W. To avoid confusion we will. Patel is a 55 year old native and citizen of India. Patel was convicted upon a plea of guilty in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri of the offense of harboring an undocumented alien in violation of INA S 274(a)(1)(A)(iii). Patel's conviction was based on his employment of the alien. Both in his brief and in oral argument (without contradiction by the government) and the government's Response to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the District Court is in agreement. The government stated that it believed the home probation followed the prison sentence but there is some ambiguity in the record. 4 Although persons who are confined to a penal institution for 180 days or more cannot establish good moral character. Patel has not lost his eligibility for naturalization because his jail sentence was less than 180 days.
	OPINION/ORDER Powell is substituted for his predecessor Madeline K. Are hereby withdrawn. A dissenting opinion by Judge Kleinfeld are filed simultaneously herewith. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. POWELL 12379 The petitions for rehearing and for rehearing en banc are. Circuit Judge: Eudene Eunique was denied a passport because she was severely in arrears on her child support payments. She brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief on the theory that the statute and regulation authorizing that denial were unconstitutional. BACKGROUND When Eunique's marriage was dissolved. Her husband was awarded custody1 of the children. She was ordered to pay child support. By 1998 she was in arrears in an amount over $20. The arrearage continued to grow.2 Despite the fact that she is unable or unwilling to pay her child support obligations. He was designated as primary caretaker. She was able to enter Mexico without a passport. 1 12380 EUNIQUE v. There is no dispute that California has adopted a procedure and that it followed the procedure in this case.
	OPINION/ORDER This litigation was brought as a class action by inmates in New York City jails challenging the defendants' asserted failure to provide them with educational services to which they are entitled under New York State and federal law. The instant lawsuit arises out of a complex of allegations that the New York City Department of Education (
	OPINION/ORDER That those statements were involuntary and the product The Honorable Peter Beer. That the statements made and the consent to search signed after those warnings were given were involuntary as well. After the briefs were filed in this appeal. We will AFFIRM the judgment of the district court denying Jones's motion to suppress.
	OPINION/ORDER This litigation was brought as a class action by inmates in New York City jails challenging the defendants' asserted failure to provide them with educational services to which they are entitled under New York State and federal law. The instant lawsuit arises out of a complex of allegations that the New York City Department of Education (
	OPINION/ORDER This litigation was brought as a class action by inmates in New York City jails challenging the defendants' asserted failure to provide them with educational services to which they are entitled under New York State and federal law. The instant lawsuit arises out of a complex of allegations that the New York City Department of Education (
	98-1465 -- U.S. V. ALAHMAD -- 05/01/2000 Telling her that he and Brittny were in Jordan. Thereafter Collins Pottebaum and various public authorities were unable to locate either Brittny or defendant. In March 1997. 19 1 117(3) (1999) provides that a
	OPINION/ORDER He disputed the manner in which the state court proceedings were conducted. In which sole custody of his son was awarded to his ex wife. Was based on the mistranscription of the relevant Family Court proceedings by G & L Transcription Services. A private contractor to whom the transcription was outsourced. Kwasnik also alleged that N.J.S.A. 9:2 4 is unconstitutional because it is applied in a manner that gives preferential treatment to women and. Both of which were denied. The Defendants contended that suit against them in their official capacities was barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Even if it was not barred. The Complaint failed to state a claim because the defendants in their official capacities were not
	OPINION/ORDER Page 2 separates this calamity from many others is that police officers from the City of Lincoln Park. The depravity of the fact pattern often is enough to make
	OPINION/ORDER The petition for review of Zhen Hua Dong is DENIED. Xian Zou's and Shi Liang Lin's petitions are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. . . . we held that a husband whose wife was forcibly sterilized could establish past persecution under this amendment to section 101(a)(42) of the [INA].
	OPINION/ORDER Opinion by Judge Clifton *Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor. Petitioner contends that he is not removable because he is a United States citizen. Who was married to petitioner's biological father at the time of petitioner's birth. Though he did not in fact have a biological connection with that woman. We previously held that a blood relationship between a child and a U.S. citizen was not required to establish citizenship under 8 U.S.C. з 1401(g). If the child in question was not born out of wedlock. The primary issue posed in this case is whether Solis Espinoza was
	OPINION/ORDER The petition for review of Zhen Hua Dong is DENIED. Xian Zou's and Shi Liang Lin's petitions are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. . . . we held that a husband whose wife was forcibly sterilized could establish past persecution under this amendment to section 101(a)(42) of the [INA].
	OPINION/ORDER The petitions filed by both parties for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Carty was sen 16382 CARTY v. Eight years later a day before Carty was to be released on parole the San Diego County District Attorney filed a civil commitment petition against Carty pursuant to California's Sexually Violent Predators Act (
	OPINION/ORDER K.P. was born October 8. Was born on October 20. Who was twelve years old. Which stated Plumman was touching P.P. Nothing was going on. P.P. was sorry. Sandra noticed K.P.'s bedroom door was closed. K.P. was awake and lying under the bed covers. Sandra asked Plumman what he was doing in the bedroom. Plumman replied he was trying to fix something. P.P. was attending the He Dog School and requested to see the school counselor. From the time she was about eleven years old. K.P. also cried during her interview and was unable to tell investigators whether Plumman had 3 penetrated her or ejaculated. The investigators determined the girls were not safe in their home. The investigators went to Plumman's house to take protective custody of the two younger siblings and to explain to Plumman why the children were being removed from the home. Also testified Plumman asked her what was going to happen now. Agent McGrane advised Plumman he was not under arrest and he would not be arrested when the agents were done talking with him.
	OPINION/ORDER Black was convicted of various offenses related to receipt. Black was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 360 months and a life term of supervised release. Haueter was contacted quickly after entering the on line chat room by a user with the screen name of
	OPINION/ORDER Petitioner seeks relief on the grounds that the state trial court should have suppressed self incriminating statements taken without Miranda warning. That the jury instructions should have instructed the jury to consider the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter. I. No. 04 2052 The underlying facts of this case are largely undisputed. Kattura Ogburn Carter (
	OPINION/ORDER The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. He pled (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case. R. 36.3. guilty and subsequently was sentenced to thirty six months imprisonment followed by one year of supervised release. The district court adopted the presentence report's (PSR) observation that the kidnapping offense was ongoing. Were married in Syria on May 13. Hijazi Dallah was to have three overnight visits with the children each week. Dallah telephoned Hijazi Dallah to inform her he was in Syria with the children.
	OPINION/ORDER The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Petsche was charged by indictment with eight counts of child abuse and two counts of aggravated battery. The remaining counts of the indictment were dropped. Before he was sentenced. He asserted in his motion that he was actually innocent and that his plea was induced by (a) a desire to avoid a severe sentence (possibly including the death penalty) and (b) on going threats to his life in the county jail. Petsche's pleadings use the spelling
	OPINION/ORDER Carty was sentenced to state prison for a term of sixteen years. Eight years later a day before Carty was to be released on parole the San Diego County District Attorney filed a civil commitment petition against Carty pursuant to California's Sexually Violent Predators Act (
	OPINION/ORDER Eleazar Morel petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) because he was declared ineligible to apply for relief from deportation under section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Neither of which this circuit has previously addressed: whether the INS erred in imposing a requirement of seven consecutive years' domicile after the alien was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident and whether the domicile of a parent may be imputed to his or her child in appropriate cases for purposes of meeting the seven year domicile requirement. I. Morel is a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic. He was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident on December 20. 1989 when he was seventeen years old. Morel was arrested on August 24. That Morel was also convicted of
	OPINION/ORDER Gaston was convicted in the Court of Common Pleas. It ruled that the audio taped statement was admissible under Ohio Rule of Evidence 807(A). Gaston's right to confrontation was impermissibly denied under the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Confrontation Clause in Ohio v. Was the sister of K.B. The seven year old child who was named as the rape victim in Count Two of the indictment. Williams was also a friend of Ms. E.W. were also friends. Gaston testify on her behalf at her trial in which she was accused of child endangerment resulting in the death of her twenty month old son. She was concerned that Ms. E.W. was
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Petitioner Jonah R. spent almost 35 months in detention before he was sentenced to a 30 month term of confinement under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (
	OPINION/ORDER We will reverse and remand. Croft was sexually abusing his daughter. Sopko was further told that the child slept with her parents and that she had recently been out of the house naked. Told the neighbors that she was
	OPINION/ORDER Appeals his conviction on eight counts of violating 18 U.S.C. з 228(a) for
	OPINION/ORDER Arguing that the statement was taken in violation of his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and in violation of his entitlement to Miranda warnings under the Fifth Amendment. Bowdich's subsequent investigation led him to believe that
	OPINION/ORDER Garnette was arrested on June 28. Several of the images were of Christina's four year old daughter. Sitting on Garnette's lap with her underwear either removed or pulled to the side so that her genitals were exposed. Christina was being treated for ruptured ovarian cysts and taking medication that caused drowsiness. Taking the pornographic pictures of Dusty while Christina was napping. Christina's suspicions about Garnette's sexual interests were raised in May 2004 when Garnette told her that he was sexually aroused by young girls. Christina also became aware that Garnette was using the internet to trade images of adult women who were dressed to appear younger. Christina surreptitiously searched Garnette's computer while he was at work. We will use only their first names. 2 advertisement came from the United States and seven other countries. After he was arrested and read his rights. These included a series of video clips involving a four year old girl who is a known victim from Texas commonly referred to as
	OPINION/ORDER Which was found by a state court to be a common nuisance and was closed down by the state court for a year. Holding that the plaintiffs' federal claims were inextricably intertwined with the state court decision. We also conclude that we cannot determine from the face of the complaint whether the plaintiffs' procedural due 3 process claim is inextricably intertwined with the state court decision. We therefore vacate the order dismissing that claim and remand for the plaintiffs to set out the claim with sufficient detail to enable the District Court to determine whether it is inextricably intertwined with the state court decision. We will summarize the facts alleged in the complaint. We express no view on whether they are well founded. Inc. are all corporations organized under the laws of Pennsylvania. Francis and Martin Desiderio are officers. The customers patronizing Desi's were predominantly white. The residents of Wilkes Barre are predominantly white. Were in fact motivated by a desire to drive AfricanAmericans and Latinos out of Wilkes Barre.
	01-4156 -- JOHNSON V. RODRIGUES (OROZCO) -- 06/18/2002 He also asserted various state law claims. He sought a judgment declaring that the Utah state courts
	OPINION/ORDER Is hereby amended as follows: 1. Because we cannot
	OPINION/ORDER He argues he did not validly waive his right to remain silent after he was eventually given Miranda warnings. The warnings became
	OPINION/ORDER The Defendants have argued that no clear The Honorable Andrew W. While they were children. The Plaintiffs allege they were improperly removed from their mother's care and placed in an abusive foster home. Their first claim is that their substantive due process rights were violated when they were placed into an abusive home without prior investigation of the guardians. No supervision was performed during the placement despite numerous specific complaints. They were not removed from the placement for months despite knowledge of Jim Huffman's violent criminal history. The second claim is that their procedural due process rights were violated when they were removed from their mother without a hearing. Were not allowed free contact with their natural parents. Were not provided a Guardian Ad Litem or appointed counsel to represent their interests. The Defendants have argued that qualified immunity bars the entirety of this lawsuit. The law was not clearly established that state caseworkers had a duty to protect these children.
	OPINION/ORDER We have substituted the current Attorney General of the United States. Gattem and his wife subsequently filed I 485 and I 130 applications seeking to have him declared a permanent resident of the United States based on their marriage. Gattem was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He was notified that he was subject to removal from the United States on three different grounds. The third of which was eventually dropped and replaced with the ground relevant here. Which is that following his entry into the United States. Sexual abuse of a minor and was therefore removable pursuant to section 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Act. The conviction that the government characterized as an aggravated felony was a 2002 conviction in the No. 04 2102 3 Circuit Court of Du Page County. The Illinois statute pursuant to which Gattem was convicted provides: Any person who offers a person not his or her spouse any money. Solicitation of a sexual act in violation of section 5/11 14.1(a) is a Class B misdemeanor.
	OPINION/ORDER The California Court of Appeal's findings are
	OPINION/ORDER Jr. is substituted for his predecessor Jeanne Woodford. Because Hovey admitted that he had taken the young victim against her will and committed the acts that resulted in her death. Finding a number of errors but determining that none is alone or cumulatively sufficient to merit reversal of Hovey's conviction. Eight year old Tina Salazar was abducted while she was walking home from school in Hayward. Later that afternoon she was found by the side of a road. Hovey was arrested in connection with the kidnapping of another young girl. Hovey was arrested for the Salazar kidnapping and murder. Hovey was charged with kidnapping and with first degree murder with two
	99-1209 -- GAMBLE V. CARLTON -- 04/12/2000 A female Release Assistance officer in Multnomah County whose full name is not yet known (Ms. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument Plaintiff appellant D. He also alleged that he was the victim of excessive bail. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
	OPINION/ORDER Even though that issue was not before the court. Also found at Condon's studio were a small number of questionable photographs taken by Dr. Condon's introduction to Parrott and the Coroner's Office At the time the offending photographs were taken. Parrott was the Hamilton County coroner. He was the
	OPINION/ORDER This is a pro se appeal from a district court order in a removed action that dismissed appellant's complaint under the Rooker Feldman and Younger doctrines. Because this case was improvidently removed from state court. The federal district court's only option was to remand. Instruct the district court to remand the case to state court.(1) Background Appellant Mark Hunt and appellee Francheska Lamb were divorced in 1995 and given joint legal custody of their two minor children. Residential custody was initially given to Lamb. The court's custody decision bore the same case number as the parties' divorce action and was captioned. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Leave of Court. Both the motion and the
	OPINION/ORDER PA 15222 Attorney for Appellant *Honorable Will L. Ray Donald Loy is currently serving a 33 month term of imprisonment following his conviction for receiving and possessing child pornography. He will be required to serve thr ee years of supervised release. Two of which are at issue in this appeal. Arguing that the pornography condition is vague and overbr oad. That the condition restricting contact with minors is not only vague and unsupported by the record. Could also potentially inhibit Loy's ability to have and raise his own children. Holding that the challenge is properly made at this time. Conclude that the prohibition on pornography is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide any method for Loy or his probation officer to distinguish between those items that are merely titillating and those items that are 2
	OPINION/ORDER Powell is substituted for his predecessor Madeline K. Circuit Judge: Eudene Eunique was denied a passport because she was severely in arrears on her child support payments. She brought an action for declaratory and injunctive relief on the theory that the statute and regulation authorizing that denial were unconstitutional. BACKGROUND When Eunique's marriage was dissolved. Her husband was awarded custody of the children. She was ordered to pay child support. By 1998 she was in arrears in an amount over $20. The arrearage continued to grow.1 Despite the fact that she is unable or unwilling to pay her child support obligations. She was able to enter Mexico without a passport. 2896 Eunique applied for a passport. There is no dispute that California has adopted a procedure and that it followed the procedure in this case. The Secretary of Health and Human Services received that certification and was required by law to transmit it
	OPINION/ORDER Margin right: 0.5in
	OPINION/ORDER I. The facts leading up to this lawsuit are set forth in great detail in the District Court's Memorandum and Order. Although Waddle had obtained ex parte probable cause state court orders to remove some of the boarding students (and also to remove some students who were no longer at HCA and others who were not even within the jurisdiction of juvenile authorities because of their ages). There were no The Honorable E. United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 2 1 orders of any kind to remove many of the students who were taken from the school that day. The removal action was without notice to Heartland. Or their parents and was taken because of several allegations of mistreatment and abuse of students at HCA. The District Court entered a final preliminary injunction enjoining Waddle and others from
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Defendant appellant Miguel Lombera Valdovinos (
	OPINION/ORDER Hawpetoss was convicted of eight counts of commission or attempted commission of sexual offenses. Hawpetoss is a Native American who lives on the Menomenee Indian Reservation in Wisconsin. He was charged. Was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds. 18 U.S.C. з 1153(a) provides: Any Indian who commits against the person or property of another Indian or other person any of the following offenses. Who was eight years old at the time. Or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the Attorney General. Or knowingly engages in a sexual act under the circumstances described in subsections (a) and (b) with another person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years (and is at least 4 years younger than the person so engaging). Or of a State offense that would have been an offense under either such provision had the offense occurred in a Federal prison. Unless the death penalty is imposed. Or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the Attorney General.
	00-2318 -- U.S. V. WHITE -- 03/27/2001 Robert Emerson White was sentenced to six months in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons followed by a two year term of supervised release. Contending not one is reasonably related to protecting the public or achieving his rehabilitation. White selected the mode of delivery and was assured the seller was not involved in a sting operation. White was again discovered drinking alcohol. White to six months in custody followed by two years of supervised release with five special conditions.
	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER Sitting by designation. 2 1 FACTS Brenda Birmingham is mentally handicapped and suffers from cerebral palsy. Was abusing her. Brenda was placed in ADHS protective custody. The Boone County Probate Court held a hearing to determine whether Brenda was competent to choose where to reside. The Probate Court concluded that she was. Rose was not notified in writing of the meeting. The school denied her request on the grounds that Brenda was eighteen yearsold. Was in protective custody. School officials consulted Brenda's ADHS social worker and determined that it was in Brenda's best interest to graduate with the current class so that she could focus on learning independent living skills in a community independent living program. Was graduated on May 25. Rose was not given prior written notice of the school's decision to graduate Brenda. It is clear from those facts that the IDEA was violated. Unless doing so is inconsistent with state law. That a disabled student may graduate before one of these requirements is met if procedural safeguards are followed.
	OPINION/ORDER Defendant appellant (1) argues that he has been deprived of his right to appeal because certain trial exhibits have been destroyed. (2) that 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 his trial counsel was ineffective. challenges to his sentence. He was. His messages were designed to gain Skaterboard's trust. He assured Skaterboard that he was
	OPINION/ORDER Defendant appellant (1) argues that he has been deprived of his right to appeal because certain trial exhibits have been destroyed. (2) that his trial counsel was ineffective. He was. His messages were designed to gain Skaterboard's trust. He assured Skaterboard that he was
	OPINION/ORDER OVERVIEW We took this case en banc to clarify the narrow scope of absolute immunity after Supreme Court decisions have taken an approach that is fundamentally inconsistent with the reasoning of our earlier circuit authority involving immunity for family service social workers. We are asked to review a district court order that deferred a ruling. Because we conclude that the order is not appealable. Felt itself bound by our prior circuit law and held that the district court should have dismissed the case on immunity grounds. Where the reasoning or theory of our prior circuit authority is clearly irreconcilable with the reasoning or theory of intervening higher authority. We hold that Antoine and Kalina effectively overruled Babcock to the extent its reasoning is inconsistent with them and that the district court did not err in ordering limited discovery as to the functions performed by the defendants. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The facts are not complex. We must accept them as they were set forth in the complaint.
	OPINION/ORDER GONZALES 15815 Cuevas Gaspar is removable. Cuevas Gaspar was convicted for being an accomplice to residential burglary under Washington law. Cuevas Gaspar asserts that the BIA erred in concluding that he was removable because his conviction constituted a crime of moral turpitude. That he have resided in the United States continuously for seven years
	OPINION/ORDER In this appeal we conclude that the Attorney General did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in denying an alien's request to have his dependency status determined by a state juvenile court. We also conclude that the federal courts have jurisdiction to review the ruling under the Administrative Procedure Act. We will affirm the District Court's order denying relief to the plaintiff alien. Plaintiff is a young man. There is some indication in the record that the plaintiff may be a citizen of Morocco. 2 who arrived in Newark. His request was denied by an immigration judge and that decision was affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Plaintiff asserts that he lived with his parents in Algeria until they were both killed by a bomb when he was about ten years of age. He then lived with an aunt in Algeria until he was twelve years old. He told the INS on his initial interview that he was born on July 25. The dentist opined that plaintiff was more than 18 years of age. This provision applies to immigrants who have been declared dependent by a juvenile court that has deemed them eligible for long term foster care because of abuse.
	OPINION/ORDER Powers was on brief for appellees.
	OPINION/ORDER A woman the police suspected was his girlfriend. Hudson maintains that both searches were violations of the Fourth Amendment and the evidence they uncovered must be suppressed. Hudson submits that he is entitled to re sentencing on the grounds that the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are now advisory. The facts are as follows. A witness identified Defendant Hudson from a series of suspect photographs and a warrant was issued for Hudson's arrest. The charge was aggravated robbery. Investigator Glenn Hesson of the Gallatin Police Department undertook to locate Hudson and arrest him but was initially unsuccessful. Hollis was unable to confirm or deny Hesson's suspicion that Hudson was Potts's boyfriend and that the two shared a child. Potts was the driver and the passengers were one infant and two black males later identified as Hudson and Charles Burford. The testimony at the suppression hearing suggests that it was the Pantry's manager. They were boyfriend/girlfriend and were н had shared a child.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. A corporation that is wholly owned by Bruette. The order granting summary judgment and the orders regulating discovery are affirmed. Who was then age 16. Because J.C. was spending considerable time at the residence. That Bruette and Kuehn were in a personal relationship and lived what Bruette termed
	OPINION/ORDER Line 16 the word
	OPINION/ORDER Robert Brown was banned from all properties or programs operated by the Michigan City Department of Parks and Recreation. Brown is a resident of Michigan City. Washington Park (the
	OPINION/ORDER Both the AD&D and the supplementary life insurance coverage was subject to a suicide exclusion. The basic life benefit was not. At the time of Foster's death Phillips Foster was the beneficiary for both the basic life and the AD&D coverage. Jeramy and Angela were Foster's children from The Honorable Ann D. Craig and Ian were children from his second marriage to Nancy Ruhland.2 Foster was found dead on July 18. Contacted the Minneapolis Police Department to report that Foster was missing. Later that morning his body was found on the side of St. The body was dressed completely in white. A note was found in his shoe that had writing on both sides. On the other side of the note was
	OPINION/ORDER Immigration and Naturalization Service (
	OPINION/ORDER I. Introduction Defendant Appellant Reo Benally was convicted by a jury of one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor under the age of sixteen while in Indian Country. Benally was sentenced to 324 months' imprisonment to be followed by five years' supervised release. Background The events giving rise to the charged conduct occurred while Benally was acting as guardian to his twelve year old granddaughter. In the care of Benally while Rowena was living in Phoenix. N.W. and her sisters were sharing a bed. She claimed to have pushed Benally away with her legs and to have grabbed the knife and thrown it across the room. She claimed that at least some of the other children were awake and crying. She was back on the bed. Benally was applying lotion to and rubbing her genitals with his fingers and penis and kissing her legs and breasts. Said he was going to commit suicide. Most remembered either seeing Benally without his clothes on top of N.W. or said Benally was next to N.W. on the bed. Several indicated they were scared or crying or heard N.W. crying or screaming.
	OPINION/ORDER Is a sixty six year old paraplegic on California's death row. Daniels was convicted of two counts of first degree murder for the shooting deaths of police officers Dennis Doty and Phil Trust. Daniels was sentenced to death on January 31. It is necessary to first review the events surrounding a bank robbery Daniels committed in 1980. Daniels was shot nine times by police officers. Daniels was rendered a paraplegic and confined to a wheelchair. On the same day Daniels was sentenced. Although Daniels's physical distress was somewhat lessened. Roth was disturbed by Daniels's psychological condition and expression of suicidal thoughts. Daniels was released on bond. He was beaten. Daniels was ordered to surrender to custody. A warrant was issued for his arrest. Officers Doty and Trust were sent to arrest Daniels at the residence of James Cornish. They were shown to Daniels's bedroom by his caretaker. Cornish's infant son were in the house at the time. While Ross was assisting Daniels with getting dressed. Doty was lying on the floor.
	SNOWDEN V. SINGLETARY (2/18/1998, NO. 94-4303) Because all issues raised by Snowden in his habeas petition were either totally exhausted in state court or were already procedurally barred from further consideration in state court. We address the claims in the petition that were exhausted. Snowden was convicted of five counts of child abuse for acts which allegedly occurred at his home. Snowden was sentenced to two consecutive life terms. Snowden appealed his conviction to the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida. That motion was denied by the state trial court without an evidentiary hearing. This report and recommendation was adopted by the district court. Relief was denied. (5) The trial court permitted the State's expert witness to testify that Snowden's counsel was abusive to one of the children during a deposition. That is. Snowden must have raised these claims in state court to allow the state courts the opportunity to rule on the federal issues: the doctrine of exhaustion of state remedies. I. While important in assuring that constitutional rights are observed.
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Marc Hilaire Joseph petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's determination that he is deportable as charged. Joseph contends that he is not subject to deportation because he is a United States national. For the reasons that follow we will grant Joseph's petition for review. Joseph was born in Haiti on July 5. He alleges that his mother was Rosemane Joseph.1 According to Joseph. Rosemane became pregnant with him when she was 12 years old as a result of being raped by an unknown assailant. He Rosemane died before the commencement of the immigration proceedings at issue here. 1 3 was raised in Haiti by his grandparents н Rosemane's father. Hermann and Lolita are now deceased. He also claims that he grew up believing that Hermann and Lolita were his father and mother. That Rosemane was his older sister. He maintains that he did not learn that Rosemane was actually his mother until he was 13 years old. It is undisputed that Rosemane came to the United States in 1981 and settled in New Jersey.
	OPINION/ORDER Because all issues raised by Snowden in his habeas petition were either totally exhausted in state court or were already procedurally barred from further consideration in state court. We address the claims in the petition that were exhausted. Snowden was convicted of five counts of child abuse for acts which allegedly occurred at his home. Snowden was sentenced to two consecutive life terms. 2 Snowden appealed his conviction to the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida. That motion was denied by the state trial court without an evidentiary hearing. This 3 report and recommendation was adopted by the district court. Relief was denied. (5) The trial court permitted the State's expert witness to testify that Snowden's counsel 4 was abusive to one of the children during a deposition. That is. Snowden must have raised these claims in state court to allow the state courts 1 In Snowden's petition to the district All the additional bias. Exclusion denial were of of court for relief he included these claims.
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Marc Hilaire Joseph petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's determination that he is deportable as charged. Joseph contends that he is not subject to deportation because he is a United States national. For the reasons that follow we will grant Joseph's petition for review. Joseph was born in Haiti on July 5. He alleges that his mother was Rosemane Joseph.1 According to Joseph. Rosemane became pregnant with him when she was 12 years old as a result of being raped by an unknown assailant. He was raised in Haiti by his grandparents н Rosemane's father. Hermann and Lolita are now deceased. He also claims that he grew up believing that Hermann and Lolita were his father and mother. That Rosemane was his older sister. He maintains that he did not learn that Rosemane was actually his mother until he was 13 years old. It is undisputed that Rosemane came to the United States in 1981 and settled in New Jersey. She was admitted to the United States as an immigrant on March 23.
	OPINION/ORDER Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. The facts of this case are set forth in some detail in a prior opinion associated with Love's Brady claim. Love was convicted following a jury trial of first degree rape. He was sentenced to two concurrent life terms plus five years. When he was her mother's live in boyfriend. Everette testified that the minor's hymenal opening was unusually large for a girl of her age.3 Second. Testimony was received from the minor's grandmother. Who was in the apartment with the minor and Love at the time of the alleged incident but unaware that it had occurred. The defense theory at trial was that Love was an innocent man falsely accused by a minor who was emotionally disturbed. Defense counsel was able to elicit from the minor concessions of her animosity. Setting fires in her residence that were followed by psychiatric counseling. See infra]) were introduced. He claimed her account was simply false and attributed it to her animosity and resentment of his relationship with her mother.
	OPINION/ORDER Because all issues raised by Snowden in his habeas petition were either totally exhausted in state court or were already procedurally barred from further consideration in state court. We address the claims in the petition that were exhausted. Snowden was convicted of five counts of child abuse for acts which allegedly occurred at his home. Snowden was sentenced to two consecutive life terms. That motion was denied by the state trial court without an evidentiary hearing. This report and recommendation was adopted by the district court. Relief was denied. (5) The trial court permitted the State's expert witness to testify that Snowden's counsel was abusive to one of the children during a deposition. That is. Snowden must have raised these claims in state court to allow the state courts the opportunity to rule on the federal issues: the doctrine of exhaustion of state remedies. While important in assuring that constitutional rights are observed. Is secondary and limited. Federal courts are not forums in which to relitigate state trials.
	OPINION/ORDER The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Holtz's residence was used to disseminate child pornography. She informed the authorities she possessed a large number of images because she believed they provided her with a degree of control of the chat rooms by
	SNOWDEN V. SINGLETARY (2/18/1998, NO. 94-4303) Because all issues raised by Snowden in his habeas petition were either totally exhausted in state court or were already procedurally barred from further consideration in state court. We address the claims in the petition that were exhausted. Snowden was convicted of five counts of child abuse for acts which allegedly occurred at his home. Snowden was sentenced to two consecutive life terms. Snowden appealed his conviction to the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida. That motion was denied by the state trial court without an evidentiary hearing. This report and recommendation was adopted by the district court. Relief was denied. (5) The trial court permitted the State's expert witness to testify that Snowden's counsel was abusive to one of the children during a deposition. That is. Snowden must have raised these claims in state court to allow the state courts the opportunity to rule on the federal issues: the doctrine of exhaustion of state remedies. I. While important in assuring that constitutional rights are observed.
	98-2087 -- U.S. V. CHARLEY -- 08/27/1999 Circuit Judges.
	OPINION/ORDER Hanson was later convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. з 844(i) (1998). The issues before us are whether Hanson was in custody when he was interrogated by federal agents about the attempted arson. We hold that Hanson was in custody. Reverse his conviction because his confession is inadmissible against him. The agents explained that they were investigating recent vandalism at the abortion clinic and wanted to show Hanson photos of the clinic. The agents did not tell Hanson that he was the prime suspect in their investigation of the arson attempt that had occurred eight months earlier.1 Hanson agreed to accompany them to the field office. He was with the agents for at least three hours in total.5 There is no video or audio record of their conversation. 1 2 3 Suppression Hearing Transcript at 30 31. There is no dispute in the record as to whether the back seat door was locked. The only variance in the record is whether it was locked by a child safety mechanism or an automatic lock that activated once the vehicle was in gear.
	OPINION/ORDER Esther Olowo is a native and citizen of Nigeria who has lawful permanent resident status in the United States. If she is returned to Nigeria. Her two daughters will be subjected to female genital mutilation. Olowo was living with her family in Chicago when a family friend. Babatunde Ali (who also was living in Chicago at the time). The two were not on the best of terms. Olowo said that she was the child's mother. Olowo and Grace were called back because INS inspectors had detained Ms. The inspectors suspected that all four were traveling together. Olowo said that she was Grace's
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Penile plethysmograph testing is a procedure that
	98-2087 -- U.S. V. CHARLEY -- 05/07/1999 Circuit Judge.
	OPINION/ORDER Circuit Judge: Defendant Jose A. appeals the district court's finding that he is a juvenile delinquent under 18 U.S.C. з 5032. Fifteen year old Jose was arrested after government agents found cocaine hidden in the vehicle he was driving from Mexico into the United States. Because Jose was a minor. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. з 1291. Jose was driving a gray Toyota 4 Runner with a Mexican license plate. Jose stated that the vehicle was his. The 4Runner was taken for a secondary inspection. When Agent Cabrera asked Jose if he knew why he was being detained. Jose replied that the agents had told him that he was being detained because they found drugs in the car he brought across the border. Because he was a minor. Jose responded that his family did not have a telephone. Llanes Angulo told Agent Cabrera that Jose's mother was at work and that she did not have access to a phone at her workplace. She also said that she did not have a telephone number for Jose's father. Who was separated from Jose's mother.
	POMPEY V. BROWARD CTY. This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Pompey v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FC0CCCB40EB0AD9088256ABE005B1763/$file/0016494.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dissent by Judge Silverman Defendant Roderick Hickman was erroneously named as Rodney Hickman. The Honorable Myron H. We conclude that the right to procreate survives incarceration and that the factually unsupported arguments put forth by the Warden as legitimate penological reasons to restrict Gerber's exercise of his right to procreate are insufficient to justify dismissal of the complaint. I. BACKGROUND1 This case concerns a life term prisoner's effort to have a child by artificially inseminating his wife. Artificial insemination is a noncoital process in which semen is collected from a man under laboratory conditions and then introduced into a woman's body with a needleless hypodermic syringe at a favorable time in her ovulation cycle. 202 (1997) (noting a conservative estimate that there have been more than 500. Gerber was sentenced to 100 years to life imprisonment plus eleven years pursuant to California's three strikes law. He is constrained in employing the usual methods for achieving this goal because he is a life term prisoner incarcerated in California. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/95-4214.opa.html">POMPEY V. BROWARD CTY.<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Pompey v. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/06/99-2316.htm">99-2316 -- U.S. V. REYES PENA -- 06/28/2000<BR></A><BR> He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 210 months. (2) there was insufficient evidence to support an enhancement for the use of force. We affirm. <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0CD63A539857F6F388256D7500835A5B/$file/0210071.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> For which an 8 level enhancement was appropriate. Was not a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200410279.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Buying or selling a minor with knowledge the minor will be portrayed as engaging or appearing to engage in sex acts. з 943.0435(1)(a)(1).1 Further. Anyone moving to Florida who has been convicted of similar crimes or has been designated as a sex offender in another state will also be considered a sex offender in Florida. з 943.0435(1)(a)(2) (3). The sex offender must </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-4358.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BACKGROUND Keegan Evanauskas was born on June 20. Keegan was immediately flown to UCH and placed in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) because doctors diagnosed him with a congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). Keegan's left lung did not fully develop in the womb and was only the size of a nickel. He required fourteen different medications that were administered through his feeding tube or intravenous sites in his head. Keegan spent the first seven months of his life at UCH until he was released to his parents' care in January 2001. During the month Keegan was home. He was readmitted to the hospital on two different occasions. Keegan stopped breathing and was rushed back to the hospital. Doctors discovered a blood infection and he was readmitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) at UCH in early February 2001. While Keegan was hospitalized at UCH his parents' relationship with hospital staff was troubled. Complained when Keegan's circumcision and G tube placement surgeries were delayed in order to accommodate more urgent needs of other children. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8CBB7658AA229E4A88256E5A00707CA0/$file/0016494.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dissent by Judge Silverman Defendant Roderick Hickman was erroneously named as Rodney Hickman. *The Honorable Myron H. We conclude that the right to procreate survives incarceration and that the factually unsupported arguments put forth by the Warden as legitimate penological reasons to restrict Gerber's exercise of his right to procreate are insufficient to justify dismissal of the complaint. I. BACKGROUND1 This case concerns a life term prisoner's effort to have a child by artificially inseminating his wife. Artificial insemination is a noncoital process in which semen is collected from a man under laboratory conditions and then introduced into a woman's body with a needleless hypodermic syringe at a favorable time in her ovulation cycle. 202 (1997) (noting a conservative estimate that there have been more than 500. Gerber was sentenced to 100 years to life imprisonment plus eleven years pursuant to California's three strikes law. He is constrained in employing the usual methods for achieving this goal because he is a life term prisoner incarcerated in California. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-8108.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Because plaintiff is proceeding pro se. This is the third civil rights action that plaintiff has filed based on allegations that various employees of several Wyoming state agencies violated his constitutional rights by depriving him of custody of his adopted son. We agree with the district court that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's complaint. Federal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction over 1983 claims that effectively seek appellate review of state court child custody determinations. 437 (10th Cir. (1) The background facts relating to the state court child custody proceedings and the termination of plaintiff's parental rights are set forth in the opinion of the Wyoming Supreme Court in BSC v. We also reject plaintiff's argument that he has stated a federal question for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1331 based on his claim that his due process rights were violated by the Wyoming state authorities' delay in notifying him of Cody's mother's voluntary relinquishment of custody in favor of the Department of Family Service. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200608/03-7060a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. 2 Ralph L. Abramson was on brief. Circuit Judge: Two District of Columbia (D.C. or District) firefighters who were injured and the families of their two colleagues who died in a May 1999 fire (Firefighters) brought a civil rights action against the District and Donald Edwards. That is. Soon after entering the townhouse the two were separated and Cooper exited the building without Phillips. Unaware that Phillips and Cooper were inside. Relied on a portable radio device rather than the stronger signal mobile radio mounted in his vehicle that he could have used had he established a fixed command post. He told Battalion Chief Wilk that Matthews was still in the townhouse. Unaware that Morgan and Phillips were still inside as well. Ventilation is the process by which firefighters remove a fire's byproducts (such as heat. Including Wilk and Cooper.4 The Firefighters argued Edwards was deliberately indifferent to his duty to ensure that the Department complied with its own standard operating procedures (SOPs) and that his deliberately indifferent conduct deprived the Firefighters of their </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1FB3A0798C5F718488256A2900575A67/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. Its check on legislative power is quite limited it merely requires that punishment be prospectively imposed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTQxMDQtcHJfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-4104-pr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While those proceedings were pending. Concluding that it did not have jurisdiction to review state child custody determinations under 28 U.S.C. з 2254. Middleton's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6A44BAFB1546008588256E5A00707ADD/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. Its check on legislative power is quite limited it merely requires that punishment be prospectively imposed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EB78FACED3E3FDE888256EE600552454/$file/0270662.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The opinion published at 356 F.3d 1027 (9th Cir. 2004) is amended as follows: 1. Lines 5 12 of Section III.A.2: Delete We have held that such a due process challenge requires two showings. The petitioner must allege facts to allow the court </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-8029.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> This appeal arises under two rarely invoked statutes. Aragon for alleged sexual offenses committed in this country while she was under 16. It held that (1) it did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the ATS claims because </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/05/97-8102.htm">97-8102 -- U.S. V. MALSON -- 05/13/1998<BR></A><BR> We will treat Mr. Malson is correct when he surmises that he misled us when he stated in his brief. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9E6D29E318F983B388256E240077A09F/$file/0270662.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Relief under the Convention Against Torture.1 He asserts that his claims were prejudiced due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Which he claims will recur if he is returned to China and that Lin's counsel failed to discover critical facts. I. JURISDICTION We have jurisdiction to review the BIA's Order dismissing Lin's Motion to Reopen under 8 U.S.C. з 1252(b)(2). Which were adopted by this court in Lata v. For brevity's sake we will refer only to Lin's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19986882.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was armed with a rifle. While Peoples was armed with a deadly weapon. Recommended that Peoples be sentenced to death for each murder by an 11 to 1 vote. 2 This opinion is organized as follows. He joined Peoples and the Franklins who were sitting around a table. 3 Peoples knew about the Corvette because he had been a member of a work crew that built a fence around the Franklins's backyard and from time to time had performed odd jobs in and around the Franklin residence. 3 Peoples soon left the table to look for the Franklins' ten year old son. He brought him to the table where Gooden and the boy's parents were sitting. Gooden replaced her gag and 4 Paul Franklin was seriously disabled as a result of shrapnel injuries suffered in Vietnam. Gooden remained with the Corvette and pick up truck while all of this was taking place. Was walking toward the Talladega Downs when Peoples arrived at the apartment complex. He told her that it was an early birthday present for his wife. As they were talking. She noticed what he was wearing a light colored shirt and blue jeans. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/987002A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Senior Judge Butzner wrote a dissenting opinion. Judge Murnaghan heard oral argument in this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. 2 BELL v. Bell was convicted by a jury in North Carolina of fifty eight counts of sexual misconduct comprised of eight counts of first degree rape. Because Bell's petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed after the April 24. 1602 (2000). 2 The record indicates that twenty seven additional counts were dismissed during the course of the trial. 1 BELL v. When Wendy was awakened on a Saturday morning by Bell. Wendy was twelve years old and in the sixth grade. Bell was fiftyfive years old. The threat was effective. While his wife was sleeping or at work. Both of whom lived nearby and were friends of Wendy. Toni also testified that she was present at Bell's home on one occasion when he sexually molested Wendy. Toni was eleven years old when the abuse began. Bell's wife was cooking dinner and Vicki. Vicki was twelve years old. JARVIS hoping Bell would leave Wendy alone if Vicki was present. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/01/01-6386.htm">01-6386 -- U.S. V. WYNNE -- 01/07/2003<BR></A><BR> Which was held on August 20. This hearing was scheduled for September 20. The final order was entered against Wynne by default. Foreman went to the duty judge to have the VPO amended to reflect her new address.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept2000/99-14778.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MUEGGE (9/7/2000, NO. 99-14778)<BR></A><BR> Judge.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/08/062911P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sued the United States of America alleging that it was legally responsible. Were negligent and caused Dakota's injuries. Garri's deviation was not the proximate cause of Dakota's injuries and entered judgment in favor of the United States. Garri's deviation was not the proximate cause of Dakota's injuries. I. BACKGROUND Dakota was born on August 3. Dakota had no pulse and was not breathing. Tilelli testified that all medical practitioners have a duty to review all medical data available to them. There is generally no requirement to obtain the entire medical record when a patient visits the emergency department. Garri's failure to review Dakota's records was the proximate cause of Dakota's injuries. He testified </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/09/951897P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Several state court actions dealing with Amerson's custody rights were proceeding simultaneously. We conclude without extended discussion that the district court's detailed discussion of the abstention principles cited above is correct as applied to Amerson's equitable claims. The relief Amerson seeks is redress for </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/aa14eba87bd3a19c88256b37007c1049/$FILE/0015537.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> As Independent Executrix of the Last Will of Michael D. We must decide whether a witness in a state quasi judicial proceeding is immune from a breach of contract action arising out of his testimony. Divorced in 1994 and are embroiled in a bitter and protracted child custody battle. Which is taking place in a Utah state court. Patton was heard by an Administrative Law Judge in Phoenix in May of 1998. Patton was a pedophile and a danger to children. II This is a diversity action under 28 U.S.C. з 1332. Because this suit was filed in the District Court of Arizona. The objective is to apply the law of the state that has the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1053.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.A.</U> was on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june95/94-8580.opa.html">LOVINS V. LEE<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Lovins v. Circuit Judge:<p> <p> In this tragic case a young woman was kidnapped and brutally raped by a violent criminal who had been temporarily released from custody while serving a jail sentence. The issue presented is whether the victim has a substantive due process right to recover from those responsible for the criminal's release. Which is alleged to have been contrary to state law. Binding precedent requires us to hold that there is no general substantive due process right to be protected against the release of criminals from confinement. Danny Leonard Ray was serving a sentence in the Douglas County. At the time he committed and was convicted for those crimes. Ray was on probation. Ray was made a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/06/00-2186.htm">00-2186 -- U.S. V. WILLIE -- 06/19/2001<BR></A><BR> Willie was indicted by a grand jury on six counts of sexual abuse of his ten year old daughter. Because the issues in this case are particularly dependent on the facts. Willie was thirty years old. Leslie were their four daughters. Which is when the sexual abuse most often took place. <p> On September 20. Leslie was at work and Mr. Willie was watching the children. Believing that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/01/01-5104.htm">01-5104 -- WESTON V. WOODWARD -- 01/15/2002<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Petitioner Carlie Ray Weston filed this pro se habeas corpus action challenging his incarceration for contempt of court. Because he is no longer in custody and has failed to demonstrate that he has suffered specific collateral consequences from the finding of contempt. He is not entitled to habeas relief. <p> The record indicates that Mr. Weston was incarcerated in the Tulsa County Jail for willfully violating a divorce decree by failing to provide child support. He may make this showing by demonstrating that the issues that he raises are debatable among jurists. Weston was released from incarceration. <u>See</u> Rec. doc. 8. Weston's petition is moot. <p> Section 2254 requires that the petitioner be </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6991788B7688EED2882571290081703C/$file/0335333.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Shields is not entitled to qualified immunity. I. Introduction The following initial facts are undisputed. There are indeed facts which the parties dispute. She told Shields that the Burns family was unstable. Though the investigation concluded he was not responsible. RIDGEFIELD 2233 handling the case that she was anxious to have the investigation started. The officer responsible for the case was out. Shields claims he did so because the Burns house was on the way to the Kennedy's. Kennedy called a friend because she was very frightened of what Michael's and his mother's reactions would be. Shields had told her Angela was very angry after their conversation and that she and Michael had begun to yell at one another. The case was removed to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. We must then determine whether Shields is entitled to such immunity. Conclude we have jurisdiction to determine whether the trial court erred in holding Shields was not entitled to qualified immunity. [1] As a general rule. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/aug95/95-3000.html">UNITED STATES V. PASSI<BR></A><BR> The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Jurisdiction is proper in this court under 28 U.S.C. 1291. Passi stipulated the child victim was his thirteen year old biological daughter and the child victim gave birth as a result of the sexual act charged against Mr. The parties recommend that the court find that the fact that the child victim was impregnated and gave birth as a result of the sexual act charged ... warrants an upward departure of two levels under U.S.S.G. 5K2.0. (b). The parties recommend that the court find that the fact that the child victim was the daughter of the defendant warrants an upward departure under U.S.S.G. 5K2.0. The parties further agree that the defendant will argue that a 1 level departure is warranted and that the government will argue that a 2 level departure is warranted. (c). It is the intent and recommendation of the parties that the two counts of conviction. Are to be </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/06/97-2224.htm">97-2224 -- U.S. V. CONTRERAS -- 06/17/1999<BR></A><BR> Contreras was re indicted. Late in 1994 she was convicted on four counts conspiracy. Background</strong></center> <p> The history of this case up through the first appeal is well documented in <u>United States v. We only briefly recount some early background for context and focus on events since our remand. <p> Dolores Contreras is one of twenty two people charged by the government with participating in an extensive drug conspiracy run by her father. Contreras started assisting her father in this illegal enterprise when she was 17. She remained active in the criminal enterprise until she was 24. Her participation stopped only because she and her father were arrested. Denogean was an inappropriate ground for departure because the two were not similarly situated </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept2000/99-14778.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MUEGGE (9/7/2000, NO. 99-14778)<BR></A><BR> Judge.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/02/03-4085.htm">03-4085 -- ATKINSON-BIRD V. STATE OF UTAH -- 02/13/2004<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Elizabeth Atkinson Bird appeals from a district court order dismissing her pro se civil rights action for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to the <em>Rooker</em> <em>Feldman</em> doctrine.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june95/94-8580.opa.html">LOVINS V. LEE<BR></A><BR> This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Lovins v. Circuit Judge:<p> <p> In this tragic case a young woman was kidnapped and brutally raped by a violent criminal who had been temporarily released from custody while serving a jail sentence. The issue presented is whether the victim has a substantive due process right to recover from those responsible for the criminal's release. Which is alleged to have been contrary to state law. Binding precedent requires us to hold that there is no general substantive due process right to be protected against the release of criminals from confinement. Danny Leonard Ray was serving a sentence in the Douglas County. At the time he committed and was convicted for those crimes. Ray was on probation. Ray was made a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="403"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AA14EBA87BD3A19C88256B37007C1049/$file/0015537.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> As Independent Executrix of the Last Will of Michael D. We must decide whether a witness in a state quasi judicial proceeding is immune from a breach of contract action arising out of his testimony. Divorced in 1994 and are embroiled in a bitter and protracted child custody battle. Which is taking place in a Utah state court. Patton was heard by an Administrative Law Judge in Phoenix in May of 1998. Patton was a pedophile and a danger to children. II This is a diversity action under 28 U.S.C. з 1332. Because this suit was filed in the District Court of Arizona. The objective is to apply the law of the state that has the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2B4B54E478051DB488256F66000160B2/$file/0310684.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Whether LopezPatino was entitled to the three level downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. з 3E1.1. Was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/03/01-1136.htm">01-1136 -- HOANG V. COMFORT -- 03/05/2002<BR></A><BR> (INA) is unconstitutional as violative of both substantive and procedural due process. An alien convicted either of a crime involving moral turpitude if the crime was committed within five years of entry into the United States or a crime violating drug or firearm laws was subject to deportation. Detention of such aliens pending removal proceedings was mandatory. Congress amended the mandatory detention statute in 1990 and 1991 to permit the release of aggravated felons who were lawfully admitted to the United States and who could demonstrate they were not a threat to the community and were likely to appear for their hearings. <em>Id.</em><u></u> <p> <u> </u>In 1996. The AEDPA's amendment was almost immediately replaced with the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). Is a mandatory pre removal detention provision directed at criminal aliens. That: <p> The Attorney General shall take into custody an alien who <p> (A) is inadmissible by reason of having committed any offense covered in section 1182(a)(2) of this title. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTI0MzJfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-2432_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner argues that the statute of limitations should be tolled because (1) he is actually innocent of the offense for which he was convicted. (3) he was incapable of filing his state post conviction motion pro se because the library of the federal prison in which he was incarcerated did not contain New York State case law. (2) Doe did not exercise reasonable diligence during the period that he seeks to have tolled for attorney incompetence. (3) Doe is not entitled to equitable tolling on the basis of the purported inadequacies of the library of the federal prison in which he was incarcerated because he has not established that the library lacked materials adequate to prepare his state post conviction motion. We requested supplemental briefing on whether </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DA0A2F8B476A6FE688256A95007765C5/$file/9935976.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is reported at 208 F.3d 815 (9th Cir. 2000).1 Following the issuance of our opinion. The Court further held that following issuance of a final order of removal there is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7458546F1523D0AB88256AA20001EBFC/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is further amended as follows: Slip op. How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. 10296 The Ex Post Facto Clause expresses our commitment to constrain the manner in which legislatures can address intense fears of the type evoked by the return to the community of convicted sex offenders. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3736FCC72A9DD1C188256E5A00707C00/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. Its check on legislative power is quite limited it merely requires that punishment be prospectively imposed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042931p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Argues that the Commissioner and Tax Court erred in concluding that those payments were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3C06C2A185E7373388256E5A00707C06/$file/9935976.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is reported at 208 F.3d 815 (9th Cir. 2000).1 Following the issuance of our opinion. The Court further held that following issuance of a final order of removal there is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-1953.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> United States Department of Justice were on brief. Now is subject to deportation because he has committed crimes of moral turpitude such as theft. While Goncalves' application was still pending. That at least those aliens whose applications were pending on the date of AEDPA's enactment. Goncalves' application was dismissed without being heard by the BIA and he was taken into custody by federal officials. This he was required to do by the precedent of this court. Was correct in the interpretation of the statute. He should have filed in the court of appeals. Her decision is entitled to deference. The first is which federal court. That Congress neither explicitly nor by implication repealed the grant of jurisdiction in 28 U.S.C. 2241 to issue writs of habeas corpus to persons in federal custody which the federal district courts have had since 1789 and which has always been available in immigration cases. If there is jurisdiction. Is of a type traditionally resolved by the courts. The second major set of issues addresses the merits: is the Attorney General correct in her interpretation that AEDPA 440(d). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1488.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Kauch was married to Joan Berrigan until 1996. Is a sad one. We find that her actions were reasonable and therefore affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment for Benjamin.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9334DEB6F3900ED988256E5A00707C36/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is further amended as follows: Slip op. How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. 10296 The Ex Post Facto Clause expresses our commitment to constrain the manner in which legislatures can address intense fears of the type evoked by the return to the community of convicted sex offenders. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1836.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sullivan</SPAN> were on brief. Arguing that the district court could have considered the racial aspect of his relationship with his son. Louis was convicted of 14 counts of assisting in the preparation of false tax returns. The departure would have permitted Louis to receive a sentence of probation with a special condition of home detention for twelve to fifteen months. Louis was instead sentenced to twenty one months in prison. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2495.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dowell</SPAN> were on brief. Were on brief. The adoption was without incident. These documents were recognized by a Massachusetts court that finalized the adoption after Finfer. He said he was in Boston and asked to see the family. Intimating that the birth mother was having </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/677DAD9054A7918088256A920075D3DE/$file/9935845.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> How may society deal with convicted sex offenders after they have been punished for their crimes? How can society protect itself against future offenses and at the same time safeguard the constitutional rights of persons who have fully paid the price imposed by law for their crimes? We can decide the case before us without having to resolve the most fundamental question posed by the Alaska statute: that is. Be wholly ignored when imposing restrictive requirements and obligations on persons who have committed a sexual offense and been fully punished for their crimes? The plaintiffs in this action are convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences. As to defendants whose crimes were committed before its enactment. Convicted sex offenders have good reason to fear vindictive legislation. Their crimes are viewed by society as an affront to the institution of the family. Sex offenders will prey on our children and those of our neighbors. Its check on legislative power is quite limited it merely requires that punishment be prospectively imposed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov2002/01-10215-p.opn.html">CRAWFORD V. HEAD (11/12/2002, NO. 01-10215-)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0883n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Camiscione Page 2 investigators discovered that Camiscione was in possession of child pornography. Investigators confirmed that Camiscione had internet capabilities at his home and that he was the primary user. A federal search warrant was issued. Camiscione's residence was searched. 42 images of child pornography were found on Camiscione's computer and 20 more images were found on floppy discs belonging to him. One image was of a child approximately four years old. After the search and on his own free will. Camiscione underwent a full evaluation and was diagnosed with Sexual Compulsivity (Sexual Disorder. An information was filed against Camiscione in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. A plea agreement was filed. Sentencing was set for March 23. Smith concluded that Camiscione experienced reduced mental capacity and was unable to control his behavior at the time of the offense even though he knew it was wrong. Stating that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/04/031582P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court determined that Reagan was denied conflict free representation in violation of the Sixth Amendment. I. BACKGROUND Reagan was convicted in 1990 of first degree murder in Arkansas state court for the death of two year old Sarah Binkard. To the emergency room of a local hospital because she was having trouble breathing. The emergency room doctors found that her abdomen was swollen and bloated. Her diaper was bloody. She was pronounced dead approximately seventy five minutes after arriving at the hospital. Reagan was charged with first degree murder. While Renay was originally charged with second degree murder and permitting the abuse of a child. Renay's charge was later upgraded to first degree murder. The plea agreement was not finalized nor was the murder charge formally dropped until after Reagan's trial. Reagan and Renay were both represented by the same attorneyнC.W. While the murder cases were proceeding. Knauts was also appointed to represent Renay in a dispute with the state concerning the custody of her remaining three children. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov2002/01-10215-p.opn.html">CRAWFORD V. HEAD (11/12/2002, NO. 01-10215-)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge:</SPAN><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0180p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BACKGROUND Blaise Mapouya1 is an ethnic Mbochi born in Brazzaville. After recounting that Mapouya was subjected to violence and torture in the days of the 1997 98 Congolese civil war. The application included Mapouya's assertion that he would not return to Congo as long as Denis Sassou Nguesso is president. The INS charged that Mapouya was removable from the United States because he entered the country illegally. A recounting of recent events is necessary to better understand the details of Mapouya's testimony. Which is located in the southeast region of the country. Strong ethnic overtones are present in Congolese politics. The 1997 98 civil war was no different. Which are one of the larger Bantu ethnic groups. Are located primarily in the northern regions of Congo. There seems to be some confusion as to whether Petitioner's name is Blaise Mapouya. The precise dates are not at issue. The government did not allege that the asylum application was untimely. Therefore the application is treated as timely. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031668.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Grace and Preston Rutledge are former spouses. Rutledge's purpose in making the false allegations was to punish Mr. Because she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200110215.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> KAHN CLERK Petitioner Eddie Albert Crawford was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of Leslie English by the Georgia state courts in 1987. We conclude that Crawford is not entitled to relief from his conviction or sentence. Facts Eddie Albert Crawford was convicted for the murder of his 29 month old niece. The defendant was married to. The defendant was intoxicated and. During this time the victim was in the care of Mrs. He stated that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="394"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2014_012.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kevin Schmeilski began to produce pornographic images of his three stepdaughters who were 12. The sentencing judge imposed a multiple count adjustment because there were three minor victims. Schmeilski was sentenced to serve 213 months in prison for production of child pornography and 60 months for posses 1 References to the United States Sentencing Guidelines are to the 2002 version. When both are premised on the same conduct. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="394"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7024E5E91A14CEB38825710F0073F300/$file/0455831.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> MITCHELL because the evidence was constitutionally insufficient. We agree with Smith that no rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Smith caused the child's death. I Smith is the grandmother of the deceased infant. Smith's daughter Tomeka Smith is the mother of the child. He was born with jaundice and a slight heart murmur. Three days after it was diagnosed. Smith was described as always giving loving care to her grandchildren. From her own observations and from what Smith told her as the emergency unfolded and thereafter.1 The facts as Tomeka related them were not complicated. Who was approximately seven weeks old at the time. She was subjected to almost no crossexamination. Her entire testimony extends for less than three pages of transcript. 2 Yondale was approximately fourteen months old. Yolanda was approximately four years old. 3 They were seven and ten years old. She also stated that it was the first night that she slept in a different room from Etzel. Tomeka and Smith were instructed to give Etzel CPR. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="394"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D41FC04292422D7288256F87008015E6/$file/0330171.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Bruce asserts that the case against her was brought under the wrong statute. Bruce contends that she is an Indian. The government should have charged her under 18 U.S.C. з 1153. We further hold that the court's error was not harmless. Alleged that the victim was an Indian person. Bruce repeatedly argued that she was Indian. She moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that it should have been brought under 18 U.S.C. з 1153. Bruce's only defense was her claim of Indian status. Bruce introduced evidence that she is one eighth Chippewa. That her mother is an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Tribe of Oklahoma. That she was born on an Indian Reservation. That two of her children are enrolled members of an Indian tribe. That whenever she was arrested it </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AD7DD69B89CB35A588257168007C3DEB/$file/0350496.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: On slip opinion page 16488. 1 and the error was not harmless. Ordinarily we will remand to the district court for further sentencing proceedings. Judges Hawkins and Graber have Other circuits have reached different views on the question of whether appellate review of post Booker sentences should include an assessment of the district court's authority to depart under the Guidelines. Is required). 1183 (11th Cir. 2005) (remanding because grounds for departure were impermissible under the Guidelines). The petition for rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. While this third appeal was pending. We reviewed de novo whether a departure was proper under the constraints set forth in the United States Sentencing Guidelines ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0380p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Whom we will refer to as Raymond or Myers. Watts was Raymond Douglas Myers's girlfriend. Who was 14 years old at the time of the fire. Hutchins said: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/02/051862P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Coffman was then assigned as the social service worker for the case. Constance was treated for a contusion on her forehead. The report also states that Constance was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/462C71E6AB5D206C882570D800795F54/$file/0350496.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While this third appeal was pending. We reviewed de novo whether a departure was proper under the constraints set forth in the United States Sentencing Guidelines ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1583_019.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He is before us after pleading guilty to distributing child pornography. Because we conclude that Gross's sentence of fifteen years (the mandatory minimum) is not grossly disproportionate and therefore does not violate the Eighth Amendment. HISTORY No. 05 1583 Gross is a convicted sex offender. As is not unusual in these cases. He was subjected to unspeakable abuse throughout his childhood. Gross's parents separated when he was two years old. He was eventually raised by his mother. Beginning at a very young age Gross was sexually abused by four of his mother's brothers men who should have protected and nurtured him but instead used him for their own deviant pleasure. By the time he was twelve. Gross was being raped several times a week by two of his uncles. For this crime he was adjudicated as a juvenile delinquent and placed into the residential custody of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0145p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Amare will be subjected to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/02/032888P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He was indicted for murder in the second degree under 18 U.S.C. зз 1153 and 1111. Finding first that Brave Heart was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-6215.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> Human Services. Andrews's second and third lawsuits are without merit and were properly dismissed by the district court. I Although it is difficult to discern from the record. These appeals appear to have their origin in a 2001 decision by the Oklahoma Department of Human Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/06/001882P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> When two taxpayers claim a tax benefit to which only one is entitled. Before final judgment was entered in Linda's favor. Concluding that the Commissioner's litigation position was substantially justified. The earned income credit ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2002/01-14945.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. ROOT (7/10/2002, NO. 01-14945)<BR></A><BR> Root appeals his conviction and sentencing enhancement based on the fact that the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052858p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Daniel Voelker was sentenced to seventy one months in prison followed by a lifetime term of supervised release after he pled guilty to possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. з 2252(a)(2). We will vacate those conditions and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion. Briefly exposed the buttocks of his three year old daughter over a webcam that was connected to his computer. He directed agents to computer discs where the files were stored. He insisted that statements he had made about sexual contact with minors or offering his daughter for sex were merely gratuitous statements in the nature of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-9569.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> McKAY. That he is an alien and removable because he committed an aggravated felony. I. Petitioner was born in Vietnam in 1968. He emigrated to the United States and was admitted as a lawful permanent resident. He was placed with a foster family. Petitioner alleges that he was physically. Petitioner was next placed with Keith and Madonna Brue. Petitioner lived with the Brues in Wisconsin until approximately 1982 when he was placed for a year in a juvenile facility known as Ladd Lake due to behavioral problems including fights at school and temper tantrums at home. Was exposed to other troubled youth and sexual advances. Attempted suicide after his best friend was killed. Was placed at a juvenile residential <hr> treatment facility. With the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).(1) The Brues' signatures on the Application are dated April 21. Brue indicated that petitioner was mentally disturbed. Was not in the Brues' legal custody. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/AE68E60287BC2D4088256BE90080695B/$file/0016867.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. зз 1291 and 2253(a). I Benny was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment following a jury conviction of mail fraud and racketeering. Benny was charged twice in 1995 with violating the terms of his parole. Benny reportedly was associating with a person engaged in criminal activity1 and was involved in an unauthorized real estate transaction. A Commission case analyst conducted a preliminary interview and determined that there was probable cause to arrest Benny for the charged parole violations. Was reparoled on February 18. Our jurisdiction to review the Commission's decisions is limited. 802 F.2d Section 4211(c)(1) is part of the Parole Commission and Reorganization Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/004549.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: James Anthony Mason appeals the district court's sentencing determination that he is a career offender under U.S. Mason argues that he is not a career offender because his 1981 state conviction for unarmed robbery (committed when he was sixteen) should not have been counted. The probation officer concluded that Mason was a career offender. Arguing that one of the convictions used to classify him as a career offender should not have been counted. One for an unarmed robbery committed when he was sixteen. Does not qualify under Guidelines з 4B1.1 because he was not convicted and sentenced as an adult. A defendant is a career offender under Guidelines з 4B1.1 if (1) he was at least eighteen when he committed the instant offense of conviction. (2) the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is either UNITED STATES v. This was a 1990 federal conviction for a controlled substance offense that Mason committed when he was twenty six. Committed when he was a juvenile. Did not result in an adult conviction and sentence and should not have been counted as a predicate offense. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2002/01-14945.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. ROOT (7/10/2002, NO. 01-14945)<BR></A><BR> Root appeals his conviction and sentencing enhancement based on the fact that the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/053316P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arrived at Handi Rak after the search was underway. Who was assigned to search Hudspeth's office. Nash he knew there was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-30048.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> R.47.5 the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Continued to have. Was 15. Howard was indicted for violation of 18 U.S.C. з 228(a)(3). Or is greater than $10. The government introduced evidence at trial showing that 2 Howard was a computer systems analyst and programmer. Because there are not sentencing guidelines specifically applicable to the CSRA. Other Forms of Theft). forth in this guideline is ten to sixteen months. Jones is likewise unavailing. It was decided as a matter of statutory construction. It appears that the statute under consideration would have called for analysis under Lopez category three. Which we are not free to reconsider. There is no sentencing guideline specific to the CSRA. 4 mandates application of the most analogous guideline under з 2X51.1 It is not disputed that з 2B1.1 was properly applied. It is also uncontested that with an offense level of 12 and a criminal history category of I. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/04/99-4218.htm">99-4218 -- LIVINGSTON V. GARCIA -- 04/26/2000<BR></A><BR> The minor child for which they have had lawful guardianship for. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> This case arises out of a custody dispute between Jhonette Garcia and her parents. They had physical custody of Candice from the time of her birth until she was three years old. Obtained a restraining order against Michael Pierce as well as a temporary custody order while the paternity and custody proceedings were pending. Which were both considered and denied by Judge Michael Allphin. The Garcias were and are represented by Mitchell Olsen of the law firm of Olsen &. Olsen. <p> While the paternity and custody proceedings were pending. All defendants were accused of participating in a conspiracy to kidnap Candice and prevent the Livingstons from gaining custody of the child. Because the Livingstons are proceeding pro se. Based on actions these defendants took in the course of the state court proceedings.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/055077np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court sentenced Kenrick to 46 months' imprisonment Kenrick was indicted as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042610p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The question presented is whether foster parents are state actors for purposes of liability under 42 U.S.C. з 1983. We hold that they are not. Leshko was two and a half years old. Next to the sink was a large pot of exceedingly hot water. Inasmuch as the Court held that the Servises were not state actors. B. Leshko was placed in the Servis home in 1985 by the Dauphin County Social Services for Children and Youth after being removed from her mother. The laws governing foster care in Pennsylvania are substantially the same today as they were in 1985. A dependent child in Pennsylvania is one deemed by the Commonwealth to be abandoned. Foster care is not the only option available for dependent children. Government funding is provided. A Pennsylvania court held in 2002 that foster parents in Pennsylvania are county </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200515110.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> While Reed was making dinner. While they were talking. Henyard told her he was going to a night club in Orlando and to see his father in South Florida. The Lewis girls were crying and upset. This is Satan. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200012/99-5307a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. She also claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Because the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor cross examination. Bamaca committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not his. Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca. The State Department also reported that it had no information confirming that Bamaca was still alive. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/99-5307b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With her on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. She also claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity. Because the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor cross examination. Bamaca committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not his. Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca. The State Department also reported that it had no information confirming that Bamaca was still alive. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2332.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Palmer & Dodge LLP were on brief. The father's action was brought pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A5CB14182027A465882571FB00555995/$file/0474268.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor. Pleaded guilty in 1996 to sexual abuse of a minor.1 He was sentenced to 75 months in prison and 120 months of </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9C0269C32FC4AB1888256E5A00707BAF/$file/9970565.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Fernandez John Ashcroft is substituted for his predecessor. The BIA held that Hughes was removable under 8 U.S.C. з 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) because he was an alien who had been convicted of an aggravated felony. He argues that he is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-7052a.html">WILLIAM GRAY V. THEISHA POOLE<BR></A><BR> Argued the cause as amicus curiae on the side of appellant.<span style= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/01F3A1F7369F8CEB88256A72007C6068/$file/9970565.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Fernandez John Ashcroft is substituted for his predecessor. The BIA held that Hughes was removable under 8 U.S.C. з 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) because he was an alien who had been convicted of an aggravated felony. He argues that he is a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/71F1E740589D24B188256EEF0056E3A6/$file/0272390.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. з 1105a.1 Because Mengistu has not shown that a reasonable fact finder would be compelled to find that he suffered past persecution or has a well founded fear of future persecution. Abebe's asylum claim is derivative of Mengistu's. Mengistu's father and stepmother were involved with the then controlling government in Ethiopia. Petitioner Mengistu's father and stepmother were imprisoned and stripped of their civil rights by </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-5307b.html">JENNIFER K. HARBURY V. JOHN M. DEUTCH<BR></A><BR> With her </p> <p>on the briefs were Paul Hoffman. With him on the brief was Wilma A. </p> <p>Lewis. She also </p> <p>claims that while he was being tortured and for more than a </p> <p>year and a half after his death. Defendants were entitled to qualified </p> <p>immunity. Because </p> <p>the NSC and State Department officials are not entitled to </p> <p>qualified immunity on this claim. Emphasizing that </p> <p>defendants have not yet answered Harbury's charges and </p> <p>that her claims have been subject to neither discovery nor </p> <p>cross examination. Bamaca </p> <p>committed suicide and was buried nearby. This was false. </p> <p>In fact. </p> <p>Harbury learned from a prisoner who had escaped from a </p> <p>Guatemalan interrogation camp that her husband was alive </p> <p>and being tortured. Discovering that the body there was not </p> <p>his. </p> <p>Harbury met repeatedly with State Department officials. </p> <p>Saying they were concerned about Bamaca's situation. These </p> <p>officials reassured her they were seriously looking into the </p> <p>matter and told her the Guatemalan Military had informed </p> <p>them that it did not have (and never had) custody of Bamaca.</p> <p> . </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan2002/00-16361.opn.html">ROWE V. CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE(1/23/2002, NO. 00-16361)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge: </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan2002/00-16361.opn.html">ROWE V. CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE(1/23/2002, NO. 00-16361)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge: </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-15721.man.html">GRAYSON V. THOMPSON (7/16/2001, NO. 00-15721)<BR></A><BR> Darrell Grayson was convicted of the capital murder of an elderly widow and sentenced to death in the Circuit Court of Shelby County. Annie Laura Orr was an eighty six (86) year old widow who lived alone in her house in Montevallo. They were armed with a .38 Caliber handgun. Orr was elderly. Orr's bedroom where she was apparently sleeping. Darrell Grayson then placed a pillowcase over her head and wrapped two relatively long lengths of masking tape very tightly around her head so that when they were finished he[r] head then appeared to be that of a mummy. Orr's murder and was familiar generally with the Grayson family. Officers knew that Kennedy and Grayson were friends and had been seen together the previous night. Officers were aware that Grayson had worked for Mrs. Orr previously and that he was familiar with her residence. Grayson's Confessions</EM></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1916.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on brief for appellee. Conclude that the error could not have affected the verdict. I. BACKGROUND Defendant was convicted by a jury for twice orchestrating the arson of a building located on Ames Street in Brockton. Louis and defendant were tried together. Was convicted for setting the second fire only. Who was involved in the first fire. Was never charged. Joaquim was indicted on four separate counts and. Louis' brother that defendant was looking for someone who would burn down the Ames building. He was detained by the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) 3 before he could act. Which was then lit by St. Louis was a legitimate one. When her son was in INS custody. Joaquim was released. C. Motive The government introduced evidence showing that the Awons were losing money on the Ames buildings and. The property was insured for loss to the structure of up to $80. They explained that their son's name was included on the deed and mortgage only because they did not speak English fluently and needed their son's assistance to translate the documents. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B3F216ECA850F0598825707A004DCC31/$file/0335333.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> That sentence is now replaced with: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/06/022782P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Though Jane told the investigating officer she was Brown's daughter. The officer contacted Kansas police and learned that Brown was driving a stolen truck and had kidnaped a girl. We will refer to her as Jane Doe. 2 Following Brown's indictment. The random probabilities of such a match are 1 in 6. Was the only aspect of this issue that had an impact on Brown's conviction. Which stated that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/10/052110P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> One Star was charged with sexually abusing and assaulting his daughters while residing with them on the Rosebud Indian Reservation in South Dakota. Testified that their father had sexually abused them when they were young children. R.O.S. was 18 years old at the time of trial. She testified that her father had sexually abused her from the time she was 6 years old until she was 12. He pinned her down to have intercourse on the floor. Later she was hospitalized for resulting back and genital pain. The abuse stopped only after she threatened to report him when she was 12 years old. R.O.S. testified that she did not report the abuse when it was occurring because she had been afraid of One Star. She recalled an incident when One Star was physically abusing J.O.S. by choking her. Who was 13 years old at the time of trial. R.O.S. began to suspect that One Star was abusing the younger sister because One Star would leave with J.O.S. for long periods of time. One time she was crying. When J.O.S. was 6 or 7 years old. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-15721.man.html">GRAYSON V. THOMPSON (7/16/2001, NO. 00-15721)<BR></A><BR> Darrell Grayson was convicted of the capital murder of an elderly widow and sentenced to death in the Circuit Court of Shelby County. Annie Laura Orr was an eighty six (86) year old widow who lived alone in her house in Montevallo. They were armed with a .38 Caliber handgun. Orr was elderly. Orr's bedroom where she was apparently sleeping. Darrell Grayson then placed a pillowcase over her head and wrapped two relatively long lengths of masking tape very tightly around her head so that when they were finished he[r] head then appeared to be that of a mummy. Orr's murder and was familiar generally with the Grayson family. Officers knew that Kennedy and Grayson were friends and had been seen together the previous night. Officers were aware that Grayson had worked for Mrs. Orr previously and that he was familiar with her residence. Grayson's Confessions</EM></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTQ4ODJfb3BuLnBkZg==/02-4882_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The principal issue in this case concerns whether the mandatory requirement of issue exhaustion in asylum cases is also jurisdictional. Nor is it enough to permit a panel of our court to reconsider past holdings that exhau stion of some asylum questions. Is jurisdictional. It is a reason. As will be apparent. The question is determinative of the asylum case before us. 1465 U.N.T.S. 85.1 Lin's removal from the United States was first ordered in 1994. Lin had failed to establish that he had been persecuted or was likely to be persecuted by the Chinese government on account of his political opinion. In cases such as this in which deportation proceedings were initiated prior to April 1. We will use the terms </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTQ4ODIgQW1lbmRlZCB3IGRpc3NlbnRfb3BuLnBkZg==/02-4882%20Amended%20w%20dissent_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The principal issue in this case concerns whether the mandatory requirement of issue exhaustion in asylum cases is also jurisdictional. Nor is it enough to permit a panel of our court to reconsider past holdings that exhaustion of some asylum questions. Is jurisdictional. It is a reason. As will be apparent. The 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 question is determinative of the asylum case before us.1 Petitioner Lin Zhong ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-3344.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Malicious abuse of power </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/164F3F0966B78CC388257028008029A9/$file/0335333.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: Defendant Noel Shields appeals the district court's ruling that he is not entitled to summary judgment against Plaintiff Kimberly Kennedy's 42 U.S.C. з 1983 claim. Conclude the district court correctly determined that Shields is not entitled to qualified immunity. Kennedy claims to have warned Shields of Michael Burns's violent tendencies at the September 6 meeting. She told Shields that the Burns family was unstable and that she had seen a lot of violence in their home. It is undisputed that Shields had no contact with Kennedy between the September 6 meeting and September 24. That the investigation concluded that he was not responsible. Kennedy asserts that she expressed concerns about her safety and told the CAIC officer handling the investigation that she was anxious to have the investigation started. The content of this message is disputed. There was a message from Kennedy inquiring about his contact with Angela Burns and the status of the molestation case. The officer responsible for the case was out so Shields left a message. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-3193.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was suspended from school for possessing a cigarette on school grounds. Timijane Martin was a seventh grader at the Shawano Community Middle School. Telling Marinack that she was holding the cigarette for 1 Also in the locker was a book entitled </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="381"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/99-14391.man.html">NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)<BR></A><BR> BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="381"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/99-14391.man.html">NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)<BR></A><BR> BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="381"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/08/003157P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hampton's sexual abuse and production of child pornography might well have gone unnoticed and unpunished. Hampton's home was burglarized and his video camera stolen. The burglar was arrested shortly thereafter on other charges and instructed his mother to sell the camera to raise bail. Was the man on the tape by comparing it to his driver's license and Department of Revenue photos. The police identified themselves and inquired whether he was William Hampton. He denied being William Hampton and said that his name was Stephen Hampton. He told them that it was inside the house and held the door open to admit them. He handed over his own identification and admitted that he was William Hampton. Whereupon the police informed him that he was under arrest. The officers observed rooms and items that were shown on the videotape. They inquired whether there were children in the house. Hampton told them that there were not and that the toys were present because he was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="381"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/06/00-9031.htm">00-9031 -- LOVEJOY V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE -- 06/18/2002<BR></A><BR> Lovejoy appeals the tax court's determination that certain support payments he made to his ex spouse during divorce proceedings were not deductible under the Internal Revenue Code. The payments were unallocated. Meaning there was no designation as to whether they applied to child support (which is not deductible) or spousal maintenance (also known as alimony. Which is deductible). This case turns on whether Lovejoy's obligation to make these payments would have terminated automatically had his spouse died. They qualify as deductible alimony only if they would have so terminated. We conclude that Lovejoy has not met his burden of showing that the payments are deductible. We therefore AFFIRM the tax court. <p> <center>* * * </center> <p> We have jurisdiction to review the tax court's decision under I.R.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="377"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/742C988AD526C1E688257067004D01A2/$file/0430091.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Weiland argues: 1) that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(b) requires suppression of the firearms and ammunition seized during a search of his home because the warrant that authorized the search was not requested by a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="377"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-9006.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> LLP</SPAN> was on brief for appellant.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="375"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-41321.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Primarily at issue is whether the district court properly forfeited those bonds to the mothers of Pereida's children. remainder REMANDED. of the judgments is The forfeiture is VACATED. These cases are Pursuant to 5TH CIR. The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. He was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Pereida was sentenced to two concurrent 57 month prison terms. Pereida was released in January 2002. He was arrested for reckless driving and his vehicle impounded. A bulletproof vest (body armor) was found in the trunk. Testified that: the bulletproof vest was his. Pereida was in the process of divorcing his wife. She is the mother of According to the two of his children and was expecting a third. separation agreement. Pereida was to pay $1. Mirna Pereida sued in family court and recovered those payments. 2 Pereida paid his July support on 18 or 19 July (it was due the first of the month). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="375"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-41314.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Primarily at issue is whether the district court properly forfeited those bonds to the mothers of Pereida's children. remainder REMANDED. of the judgments is The forfeiture is VACATED. These cases are Pursuant to 5TH CIR. The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. He was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Pereida was sentenced to two concurrent 57 month prison terms. Pereida was released in January 2002. He was arrested for reckless driving and his vehicle impounded. A bulletproof vest (body armor) was found in the trunk. Testified that: the bulletproof vest was his. Pereida was in the process of divorcing his wife. She is the mother of According to the two of his children and was expecting a third. separation agreement. Pereida was to pay $1. Mirna Pereida sued in family court and recovered those payments. 2 Pereida paid his July support on 18 or 19 July (it was due the first of the month). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="375"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0058p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Which is located in Fort Thomas. Seventh and eighth grades and is part of the Fort Thomas Public School District. The Council has responsibility for setting school policy that is consistent with the school board's policies and that is designed to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200410/03-7149a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C9A2B3A02814FA90882571D10053541D/$file/0472798.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ornelas Chavez claims (1) the BIA erroneously required that he must have reported third party persecution to government authorities to qualify for withholding of removal under section 1231(b)(3). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. з 1252(a). Provides that a signatory nation will not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200201/01-7052a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the briefs were Alan I. Was on the briefs for appellant. With her on the brief were Robert R. Holding that all three defendants were protected by absolute immunity. The only remaining issue before this court is whether Poole is protected by absolute or qualified immuni ty. Those activities were similar to actions taken by police offi cers prior to the commencement of a criminal prosecution and. Poole is entitled to only qualified. That activity was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2004/009005p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Circuit Judge: The Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (hereinafter </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/02/052367P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Background Sitting Bear and Marshall were the parents of four year old John. Jr. from the time of his birth until he was almost four years old while Marshall was serving time in federal prison for assault with a deadly weapon. Jr. was toilet trained when he was returned to his parents. She often withheld food from him so that she would not have to clean up after him. Jr. was under Marshall's and Sitting Bear's care. These beatings were nearly daily. Sitting Bear was a forest firefighter and was away from home for stretches at a time. It is undisputed. Jr. early in the morning as Sitting Bear was getting ready for a firefighter training class and sent John. Jr. was still moving slowly when he returned to the house. Jr. was unresponsive following the blow to his head. He was transported by air ambulance to Rapid City Regional Hospital where he died the following day. Both were charged with first degree murder and aiding and abetting first degree murder. Marshall had a prior felony conviction for assault with a deadly weapon and was on supervised release from that conviction at the time of the instant offense. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DFFA142892B5F9A688256EE400800BB8/$file/0235922.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows. 1. The state post conviction court expressly found that he was not a credible witness. We are required to defer to the state court's credibility findings. 1160 n.2 (9th Cir. 2003) ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/09/98-2183.htm">98-2183 -- U.S. V. CHACON -- 09/16/1999<BR></A><BR> <p align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/71816FFD1404B48D88256E400002CEC8/$file/0210532.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are required to decide whether a California Annoying or Molesting a Child Under 18 misdemeanor conviction. That Pallares was eligible for discretionary relief from deportation in the form of cancellation of removal (8 U.S.C. з 1229b). Because the Immigration Judge erroneously advised Pallares that he was not eligible. Because Pallares' waiver of his right to appeal the removal order was not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1685465784FF183F88256E710064C888/$file/0235922.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Sophanthavong contends that the district court erred in denying his claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments when his trial counsel (1) misrepresented the applicability of Oregon's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/07/98-3183.htm">98-3183 -- CALDERON V. KANSAS DEPT. OF SOCIAL AND REHABILITATION SERVICES -- 07/06/1999<BR></A><BR> Calderon contends the allegations in her complaint were sufficient to state a claim. Such dismissal </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/04/00-1385.htm">00-1385 -- PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS SERVICES CORPORATION V. OWENS -- 04/17/2002<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1663_014.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Burgess was involuntarily committed to a Wisconsin state mental health facility after a jury found that he was a sexually violent person as defined in Wisconsin's Sexually Violent Person Commitment Statutes. Burgess now appeals to this court. 2 No. 05 1663 What distinguishes this case from the many habeas corpus petitions this court entertains each term is that it involves one additional sovereign Burgess is a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe. We conclude that the Supreme Court of Wisconsin's ultimate resolution of Burgess's jurisdictional claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established law as articulated by the Supreme Court of the United States. I Burgess is an enrolled member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (Lac du Flambeau). He is a legal resident of his tribal reservation land. Burgess was convicted of attempted second degree sexual assault of a child (a crime that he committed on his reservation) in the Circuit Court for Vilas County. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/11/00-7018.htm">00-7018 -- THOMPSON V. RAMSEY -- 11/21/2001<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Terry D. Because plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim was supported by specific factual allegations and evidence raising genuine issues of fact. Remand the case for further proceedings. <p> Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. Plaintiff alleges that he is in constant danger if he is required to share a . Who informed him that protective custody was full and that he should have thought about the consequences before he did his crime. He was again required to share a cell with a general population prisoner and that his request for protective custody to prison official Anderson was ignored. Plaintiff refused an order to pack his belongings and move to a general population unit which he felt was dangerous. Plaintiff informed the guard that he would take a write up because he was trying to get into protective custody. Was forwarded to Unit Manager Mullin. That his cellmate was threatening him based on his sex offense. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/99a0402p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Prince was arrested and detained for allegedly kidnaping her infant grandson. Hicks appeals the district court's decision on the two </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Mar1996/96a1282p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hutchinson was a member of the original panel to which this appeal was assigned. He died before the appeal was resolved. Judge Stapleton was designated to serve in his place. * Honorable Gary L. Ketcham argues that the district court erred when it failed to group the four counts of his conviction pursuant to United States Sentencing Guidelines ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CF930D760A47865488256FF9000576CD/$file/0310551.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Inside were three individuals: Vaneshia Taylor ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9F9C09F39482368988256E5A00707B76/$file/9835825.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER Petitioner Zichko's petition for rehearing is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Is deleted. 7018 2. The following two new paragraphs are added to the end of page 5498 of the slip opinion: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/01/006102P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Chief Judge Debtor Samuel Jesse Fellner appeals from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Court1 determining that certain debts he was ordered to pay pursuant to his divorce decree were excepted from his discharge under 11 U.S.C. з 523(a)(15). Because the Bankruptcy Court applied the correct legal standard and its findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. Factual Background Samuel Fellner and Kim Fellner were divorced on July 13. The divorce decree provided that each party was to pay certain individual and marital debts. The MBNA MasterCard account which Samuel was required to pay was actually in Kim's mother's name and Kim was an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052453np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will dismiss the appeal as frivolous. The parties are familiar with the facts. So we will only briefly revisit them here. Ormsby's daughter was removed from her custody by the Luzerne County Children and Youth Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/08/02-1303.htm">02-1303 -- MCKEEL V. STATE OF COLORADO -- 08/25/2003<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/53CBC544E81CC8708825701F001575F4/$file/0310551.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER We have received a motion by the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada seeking modification of the written opinions in this case (both the majority opinion and the partial concurrence partial dissent). The motion is granted in part. The one modification that the motion seeks is its elimination of the word </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/32CCF25A2206AC09882571C6007C5546/$file/0455026.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> They were entitled to qualified immunity. Because the liability of the United States was derivative of the liability of the individual defendants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. BACKGROUND1 </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTQxMDM4X29wbi5wZGY=/03-41038_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Attorney General Gonzalez is substituted for his predecessor. Decision of an Immigration Judge ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/9732.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> OFFICE OF THE This appeal was heard by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. з 46(d) (West 1993). Circuit Judge: Dwayne Allen Wright was found guilty by a Virginia jury of (1) the murder of Saba Tekle during the commission of a robbery. I. The following facts are those recited by the Virginia Supreme Court in Wright v. Was in the apartment and heard Tekle calling to her and her mother from outside the apartment. The medical examiner opined that Tekle's death was caused by a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-1151.htm">99-1151 -- DEANZONA V. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER -- 08/02/2000<BR></A><BR> Which were eventually joined. Which is located in City Park. Camps I and II at City Park combined because only fifty five children arrived instead of the ninety children who were enrolled in the two camps. Eight counselors were supervising fifty five children. At that time Redd walked twenty five yards to the lake edge where two other counselors were supervising a group of children who were fishing. The next morning Redd's body was found in Ferril Lake. <p> Brooks is the manager of the Denver Department of Parks and Recreation. Brooks was only indirectly responsible for the SIP program. Brooks was not involved with policymaking for SIP. Brooks's sole contact with the SIP program was to greet the counselors at the beginning of their training program. JURISDICTION</strong> <p> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042656p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who was born in China on October 1. Is the older of two children. His sister was born in February 1988. Before his sister was born. The government is not challenging Wang's credibility in these proceedings. We will state the facts according to his testimony during his administrative hearing at which he was the only witness. 2 parents lack formal education and do not speak Mandarin Chinese. Wang's parents were unaware of the policy until after his sister was born. Does not claim that the government imposed the fine on him or that he was responsible for its payment. It is clear that the authorities did not direct their actions at Wang. While Wang's father was in 2 AR refers to the administrative record. 3 Argentina he was kidnapped. Wang's father returned to China in 1995 but was not arrested or detained on his return. Was able to recover blankets from the home and subsequently relocated. The Wangs' previous residence was comprised of two stories and several rooms. At JFK International Airport where he was detained. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5BE5A8E1E9F5726688256A61008200B7/$file/9835825.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> ORDER Petitioner Zichko's petition for rehearing is DENIED. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. Is deleted. 7018 2. The following two new paragraphs are added to the end of page 5498 of the slip opinion: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/02/961613P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who was convicted of murder in Missouri and sentenced to death. Kelvin Malone was convicted of the 1981 murder of William Parr. He was waiting in the cab line at the Greyhound Bus Terminal in St. Parr was first in line. The bank was less than three blocks from the bus terminal. Such deliveries were top priority. Parr had been shot and was lying face down with blood coming from his nose and right ear. He was taken to Christian Northeast Hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. There was evidence that Kelvin Malone had arrived in St. Bego did not see who was there. The men drove off instead and were apprehended after a high speed chase. Three bullets test fired from one of these guns were later compared to a .25 caliber slug taken from Parr's brain. Louis police were inconclusive. Louis and which were found in the car at his arrest. Malone had been convicted and sentenced to death in California for two murders that took place in that state just a few days after Parr was killed in Missouri.3 Counsel was appointed in the Parr case on November 28. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053447np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Chavarria was convicted in the Franklin County. Chavarria was sentenced to nine months in the Franklin County Prison Work Release Program. Removal proceedings were commenced. He later was charged as removable. Who was divorced from his father. Applied for citizenship when he was 16.1 Her application was submitted with his name on it as her minor child entitled to derivative citizenship. Although he turned 18 by the time she actually was naturalized. 1999 and his mother was not naturalized until March 10. That: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/09/043891P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Jerome Albert Black Bear was indicted for assault causing serious bodily injury to his infant son. After treating doctors said that his son's fractured ribs </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/08/063134P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who was then ten years old. Becker ultimately concluded that the allegation was unfounded. Lopez noted that J.B.'s eyes and lips were bruised and swollen. Suggested that those injuries may have been self inflicted. Kilpatrick submitted medical evidence that J.B. was prone to over dramatizing events to receive attention from Ronda and that J.B. had engaged in self abuse in the past. J.B. was returned to Ronda. Ronda and Kilpatrick made comments critical of King and HHS that were published in a series of newspaper articles appearing in the Omaha World Herald and the Scottsbluff Star Herald in the spring of 2003. The context of King's statement to Ronda indicated that it was likely made to explain the consequences of testifying falsely regarding known abuse. Finding that King's conduct in the J.B. case was proper and that her comment to Ronda was not inappropriate. The discovery process was slow. There was no judicial substantiation of the allegations. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2281.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Was on brief. Fourth and fifth claims were dismissed and the district court granted Hoyt's motion for summary judgment on the remaining claims. <P> Norton now seeks our review of the district court's assertion of jurisdiction over the case and the grant of summary judgment on the promissory estoppel and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims. Hoyt led Norton to believe that he was divorced. Norton discovered that Hoyt was actually married. Hoyt told Norton he was getting a divorce. Norton was employed as an elementary school teacher in the Bristol. She asserts that she would not have remained in the relationship with Hoyt if it were not for his frequent promises to divorce his wife. No child was born of the relationship because Norton suffered a spontaneous miscarriage.</P> <P> In March 1998. Norton was distraught by this turn of events and sought counseling and medical attention to deal with the depression and anxiety she was experiencing. Norton reported that she was not able to resume work and that she possibly would not ever be able to commit to another relationship. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6E5195571556FEFB88256E29007146E5/$file/0256445.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Because the California courts have interpreted з 148 in such a manner as to incorporate a finding of no excessive force. Placed an emergency phone call to the Hemet Police Department ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="366"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/004172.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> BARTH Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Richard Barth is a sixty year old father and grandfather. Barth began communicating electronically via Internet Relay Chat (IRC) with a user using the screen name </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr2002/01-15275.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. ARBELO (4/15/2002, NO. 01-15275)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judges.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr2002/01-15275.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. ARBELO (4/15/2002, NO. 01-15275)<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judges.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/03-6144.htm">03-6144 -- U.S. V. CERVINI -- 08/11/2004<BR></A><BR> Defendant was charged in a two count indictment with (1) shipping child pornography in interstate commerce. (2) possession of child pornography that was transported in interstate commerce by means of a computer. Pursuant to a conditional plea agreement Defendant pled guilty in district court to the second count of the indictment and was sentenced to twenty seven months imprisonment and three years supervised release.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/97-6310.htm">97-6310 -- U.S. V. ANDERSON -- 09/15/1998<BR></A><BR> 3731 and affirm. <p> <center>I.</center> <p> Anderson was arrested after a successful FBI sting operation. The goal of the sting operation was to identify and prosecute members of the Internet chat room known as the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8283F095CF9990AD88256CD8005C4BEC/$file/0117246.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Broam and Manning alleged that they were entitled to special and punitive damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. з 1983 because Robert Bogan and Charles Ingram. (2) Bogan was protected from liability under the doctrine of absolute immunity. (3) Bogan and Ingram were entitled to qualified immunity regarding the remaining claims. Order reads as follows: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6545D465E06283DB8825708200801E34/$file/0399007.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Fletcher Jill Brown is substituted for her predecessor. Mitchell Carlton Sims was convicted of the first degree murder of John Harrigan. He was sentenced to death. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) does not apply to the merits of Sims's appeal because his federal petition was filed before AEDPA's effective date. Were violated by the admission of confessions obtained in a custodial setting after he invoked his rights to counsel and silence. (3) whether his right to an impartial jury was violated when a member of his jury met with a member of Padgett's jury and discussed writing a book about their experiences. (4) whether his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the prosecutor's closing argument in the penalty phase about factor (k). (6) whether counsel was ineffective in failing to object to comments that Sims argues violated Griffin v. (7) whether reversal is required on account of cumulative error. Sims was hired as a delivery driver by another Domino's. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/38F076CE3B6788FE88256E68007D45A6/$file/0273599.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction over Azanor's petition for review pursuant to 8 U.S.C. з 1105a(a). She was born and raised a member of the Urobho tribe in Kanduna. Azanor was approximately four months pregnant when her boyfriend's female relatives locked her in a room. The procedure was conducted with a razor under unsanitary conditions. No anesthesia was administered. Three months later she was admitted to a hospital where she prematurely delivered a daughter. Azanor argues that she is entitled to relief from deportation because her United States born daughter. Will likely suffer FGM if she accompanies her mother to Nigeria. The Board then denied Azanor's motion to reopen with respect to her asylum and withholding of deportation claims because her motion was neither timely filed under 8 C.F.R. з 3.2(c)(2) (now codified at 8 C.F.R. з 1003.2(c)(2)). </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/04/023997P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Brown was in custody awaiting trial on child molestation charges in Arkansas. He was sentenced to forty two months in prison. A detainer on the federal charges was personally served on Brown in the Arkansas Department of Corrections. The response was not received by the U.S. Brown was released from state custody and released on bond on the federal charges. This generally occurs if the delay is at least one year long. The extent to which a defendant must prove prejudice from a delay in prosecution is directly related to the government's reasonableness in its pursuit of the defendant. In concluding Brown's right to a speedy trial was not violated. The district court found that although the delay was excessive. It was not intentional. Brown's attempt to assert his right was half hearted because he never contacted the U.S. Brown contends no proof of prejudice was required because the three year delay was presumptively prejudicial. We cannot say Brown was relieved of his burden to show the delay actually prejudiced him. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3587_036.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> James Boyd filed an action in the district court alleging that the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) child welfare investigator Leslie Foott and her supervisor Mickey Owen violated his rights to due process in their investigation of a claim of child abuse and their finding that the claim against him for physical abuse of a child was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2489_026.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Eli Santiago was convicted by a jury of cocaine and firearms offenses. He also argues that his written consent to the search of his home was involuntary because it was based on an express or implied threat that his fiancщe and their children would be taken into custody if contraband were found there. Santiago's Booker claim will gain him a limited remand in accordance with United States v. I. Background Santiago was arrested following a controlled drug buy orchestrated by the Drug Enforcement Administration ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0301p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Wesley Hargrove was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He appeals his sentence on the grounds that his prior felonies were not violent within the meaning of the Armed Career Criminal Act ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062110np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will dismiss this appeal as meritless. Wells Fargo filed a renewed motion to have the stay lifted based on Johnson's failure to make scheduled mortgage payments from July 2004 through April 2005. Among these circumstances were that he was involved in a contentious child custody battle in New Jersey state court. That his disability income was wrongfully being paid to the mother of his child. That he was not being given credit for social security benefits being paid to one of his dependents. It is from these orders that Johnson appealed to the District Court. Despite Johnson's indication that he was appealing the Bankruptcy Court's orders vacating the automatic stay and denying his request for a stay pending appeal. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. To the extent Johnson was seeking to invoke the District Court's appellate jurisdiction over the Bankruptcy Court proceeding to obtain relief in connection with his state court child custody and child support proceedings. The Bankruptcy Court is authorized to grant relief from the automatic stay upon the request of an interested party under the following circumstances: (1) for cause. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216135.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We are compelled to agree with Alabama and must decline the ACLU's invitation. I. BACKGROUND Because the various user appellees and vendor appellees are all represented by the ACLU. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114475.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder are entitled to qualified immunity for their alleged involvement in the seizure of Elian Gonzalez ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1090.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an appeal from the district court's denial of appellant's motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 for post conviction relief. The underlying facts are uncontested. Loftus was informed that a commercial photography lab in Virginia had developed pornographic photographs of a child. She indicated that she was eleven years old and had been living with appellant. He failed to appear and was arrested almost two weeks later in Connecticut. Appellant was indicted on one federal charge of the sexual exploitation of a child. 1991.1 Appellant was represented by counsel at his change of plea hearing and at his sentencing hearing. The PSR recommended that the BOL be increased by 2 levels because the victim was under 12 years of age. 2) appellant was coerced into consenting to a search of his home in violation of the Fourth Amendment. If such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed. Appellant does not deny that the pictures were actually mailed and transported in interstate commerce. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/972512.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The policy was intended to encourage pregnant women whose urine tested positive for cocaine use to obtain substance abuse counseling. Ten women who were tested pursuant to the policy. The parties evidently agree that only injunctive relief is being sought against those individual Appellees who are state officers sued in their official capacities. Brown was concerned about a perceived rise in cocaine use among pregnant women and the consequences for the health of the users' children. A task force was formed that included Nurse Brown. The Solicitor informed the participants that because a viable fetus was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/053724np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The sole issue on this appeal is whether the District Court erred in adding that enhancement. We have jurisdiction to review Campbell's sentence for reasonableness under 18 U.S.C. з 3742(a)(1) and 28 U.S.C. з 1291. The relevant facts of this case essentially are undisputed. Included in the evidence against Campbell was a videotape he had made which contained a series of sexually graphic 2 depictions of two minor children. Only the depictions of one child are at issue on this appeal. Is the grandson of Campbell's mother's then boyfriend. The videotape depicts R.L. bathing and sleeping and reflect that Campbell was the only adult present during the taping (though not necessarily the only adult in the home).1 The bedroom scenes involve Campbell undressing R.L. while he sleeps and include R.L.'s reaction upon awakening the following morning. Although the exact dates of filming are not known. They are placed between January 1999 and December 2000. Campbell was asked to babysit R.L. on multiple occasions. The District Court is instructed to increase the offense level by 2 levels </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov99/98-3425.man.html">GLOCK V. MOORE (11/10/1999, NO. 98-3425)<BR></A><BR> Petitioner argues that he was denied constitutionally effective assistance of counsel. Were charged in Florida with the first degree murder. When they saw she was still standing. 95 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987).</P> <P> The facts surrounding Glock's arrest and trial have been developed extensively in <EM>Glock v. Glock was found guilty of all three offenses. That he was more of a follower than a leader. Thus she doubted that his participation in the crime was voluntary. That his early childhood was characterized by a lack of parental guidance.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-9533.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitioner Nicklin Me Mucuuthi is a native and citizen of Kenya. He was admitted as a legal permanent resident of this country at New York. He was convicted in Colorado state court of distribution of cocaine. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Mucuuthi contended that he should not be removed because he is a United States citizen. Or (2) The naturalization of the surviving parent if one of the parents is deceased. Or (3) The naturalization of the parent having legal custody of the child when there has been a legal separation of the parents or the naturalization of the mother if the child was born out of wedlock and the paternity of the child has not been established by legitimation. If (4) Such naturalization takes place while such child is under the age of eighteen years. (5) Such child is residing in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of the naturalization of the parent last naturalized under clause (1) of this subsection. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/11/00-6053a.htm">00-6053A -- U.S. V. CRYAR -- 11/20/2000<BR></A><BR> The age reference in the sentence is corrected to read </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/11/00-6053.htm">00-6053 -- U.S. V. CRYAR -- 11/20/2000<BR></A><BR> John Garland Cryar was indicted in the Western District of Oklahoma on four counts: (1) counts one and three charged that on two occasions in June 1999. Cryar pleaded guilty to counts two and four (the pornography counts) and was tried on the attempted sexual abuse counts. Alleging that the government failed to prove his travel from Texas to Oklahoma was for the dominant purpose of having sex with a minor and that the district court lacked venue. Cryar was convicted on the sexual abuse counts and sentenced to 144 months on all four counts and five years of supervised release. Sharpton agreed to have audio and video surveillance equipment installed in his truck. Cryar was in Texas. Sharpton recorded these conversations as well. <p> The audio and video recordings were admitted at trial as exhibits. The Western District of Oklahoma was the improper venue for this proceeding. (2) that the district court should have given his proffered instruction regarding the crossing of state lines. (3) that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov99/98-3425.man.html">GLOCK V. MOORE (11/10/1999, NO. 98-3425)<BR></A><BR> Petitioner argues that he was denied constitutionally effective assistance of counsel. Were charged in Florida with the first degree murder. When they saw she was still standing. 95 L.Ed.2d 523 (1987).</P> <P> The facts surrounding Glock's arrest and trial have been developed extensively in <EM>Glock v. Glock was found guilty of all three offenses. That he was more of a follower than a leader. Thus she doubted that his participation in the crime was voluntary. That his early childhood was characterized by a lack of parental guidance.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/April2003/014098p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm. I. Plaintiff Amanda Walker Serrano was a nine year old third grade student at the Lackawanna Trail Elementary School. Walker Serrano did not approve of the voluntary outing because she believed the circus was cruel to animals. Walker Serrano was at her classroom desk during a class period of silent reading and independent work. Carpenter then noticed that one of the female students was crying she had fallen on the ice and was bleeding. Walker Serrano contends that Carpenter told her either </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/August2002/013234.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court granted summary judgment for the City because there was no genuine issue of material fact. The District Court also granted summary judgment for Stewart and Caffey because it concluded that the federal claim was barred by a prior state judgment. Because there is no constitutional right to rescue services. Appellants have failed to state a constitutional claim. We will affirm. Was at the residence of Angela Morris. Morris dialed </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/11/99-4246.htm">99-4246 -- KANTH V. KANTH -- 11/02/2000<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> This appeal is taken from an order of the district court denying petitioner's petition under the International Child Abduction Remedies Act. The underlying facts are adequately outlined in the district court's decision. <u>See</u> <u>Kanth v. Utah 1999). <p> The purpose of the Hague Convention is to secure the prompt return of children who have been wrongfully removed or retained in order that the court of the country in which the children habitually reside can make a custody determination. <u>See</u> <u>id.</u> at 1321. The petitioner is obligated to show. That the retention or removal is wrongful. <u>See</u> . A removal or retention is wrongful if it breaches a person's custody rights under the law of the state in which the child was habitually resident immediately prior to the removal or retention and at the time of the removal or retention those rights were actually exercised. <u>See</u> <u>Lops v. The term </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0186p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Five individual defendants were sued in their individual capacities all of whom were firefighters. Who is decedent's next of kin. Who were answering a 911 call. Used excessive force in restraining Becerra and refused him appropriate medical attention when he was in an unconscious epileptic state. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0064p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Petitionerappellant Ronald Dean Combs was convicted by an Ohio jury of two counts of aggravated murder as well as a specification of an aggravating circumstance as to each count. He was sentenced to death. For reasons that will be explained below. Combs was taken to the hospital and underwent extensive treatment for his gunshot wounds. His right arm was amputated. His left arm was left partly paralyzed. Combs was charged with two counts of aggravated murder. Which is defined as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4D35277A03B8C83A882571F4007BC4A7/$file/0510282.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on the briefs. Were on the briefs. Baza Martinez contends that the imposition of a sixteenlevel sentencing enhancement was not justified because his prior felony conviction under North Carolina General Statute (N.C.G.S.) з 14 202.1. Is not </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-8008.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> O'BRIEN. He also asserts the guidelines are invalid under the Sixth Amendment pursuant to Blakely v. Then fifty seven years of age and believing he was conversing in a chat room with the mother of a twelve year old girl. To engage in sexual relations with both the mother and her daughter.(3) As Graham admitted when he entered his plea of guilty: After my wife died I was starting to visit some chat rooms online and was into adult chat rooms. I was I was in there and I met someone. After talking for several weeks we agreed that I would come here to have sex with her and her daughter. (1) </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/70EB281E79ABBA7588256ACA005BEE28/$file/9950328.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was approached by Jody Myesha Orso. A federal arrest warrant was issued for Orso for robbery of a postal letter carrier. Orso was arrested by Redondo Beach police officers on unrelated charges and taken to the Redondo Beach Police Department. Notified Inspector Galetti that they were holding Orso. Orso was handcuffed and placed in the back seat of the vehicle for the length of the drive from the police station to the office. It is undisputed that Orso was not informed of her Miranda rights at any time before or during the car ride. Telling her that a witness to the robbery thought that she might have seen a gun used. Inspector Galetti then informed Orso that the maximum statutory penalty for armed robbery of a letter carrier was 25 years incarceration. That the statutory maximum penalty for unarmed robbery of a letter carrier was ten years. Explaining that it was actually a 13318 picture of her that the letter carrier picked out. Inspector Galetti also told Orso that an individual named Main was believed to be the driver of the car involved in the robbery. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/06/96-1512.htm">96-1512 -- U.S. V. ROWLAND -- 06/02/1998<BR></A><BR> Rowland argues the warrant was invalid for lack of probable cause because the supporting affidavit failed to establish a sufficient nexus between the items to be seized and Rowland's residence. Although we conclude the warrant was not supported by probable cause. Rowland gave his name and the address of a private post office box and indicated that he was interested in incest. Rowland was authorized to receive mail there. <p> On March 7. The search warrant allowed investigators to search Rowland's residence once the package containing the video tapes was brought into the residence. <p> On March 8. While Rowland was walking back to work with the package. Rowland was observed leaving his work at lunch time. He then returned to his car and the agents followed as he drove straight home. <p> Once Rowland was home. They were still unable to determine whether he had the video tapes. Rowland at first stated he didn't know what Carr was talking about. Rowland responded that the package was at work. Carr then asked him where the contents of the package were. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3D5D7FCE8CB233A2882570D80079BCAA/$file/0430067.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 409 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) because the court imposed its sentence before the Supreme Court instructed that the Sentencing Guidelines were not mandatory. Speelman was indicted on November 21. He was charged with the Sexual Exploitation of Children. He was indicted and charged in two counts with the crime of Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Minor who had not attained the age of twelve years. Speelman was again indicted on May 23. II The Government contends that we do not have the jurisdiction to consider the merits of Mr. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BE96D59DCC5FF11B88256B7E006D27BB/$file/9899025.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Who was convicted in 1982 of first degree murder with special circumstances. V were taking a brief walk during their midmorning break from their jobs in Placerville. As they were walking under an overpass. P was gagged and her hands tied and Ms. V was raped. V to Chili Bar where the sheriff and medical help were summoned. P and determined that she was dead. The cause of death was one of three bullet wounds and a fracture through the base of her skull. V testified that one or two days after the shooting she told a police detective that her assailant </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/01/02-6341.htm">02-6341 -- SUAREZ-TEJEDA V. U.S. -- 01/16/2004<BR></A><BR> Suarez Tejeda is a Mariel Cuban who has been ordered removed from the United States. Suarez Tejeda argues that his detention and the procedures applied to his parole review are unconstitutional in light of <u>Zadvydas</u> and Tenth Circuit precedent. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C4E08A3C8AD9F9E188256E5A00707CD2/$file/9950328.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was approached by Jody Myesha Orso. A federal arrest warrant was issued for Orso for robbery of a postal letter carrier. Orso was arrested by Redondo Beach police officers on unrelated charges and taken to the Redondo Beach Police Department. Notified Inspector Galetti that they were holding Orso. Orso was handcuffed and placed in the back seat of the vehicle for the length of the drive from the police station to the office. It is undisputed that Orso was not informed of her Miranda rights at any time before or during the car ride. Telling her that a witness to the robbery thought that she might have seen a gun used. Inspector Galetti then informed Orso that the maximum statutory penalty for armed robbery of a letter carrier was 25 years incarceration. That the statutory maximum penalty for unarmed robbery of a letter carrier was ten years. Explaining that it was actually a 13318 picture of her that the letter carrier picked out. Inspector Galetti also told Orso that an individual named Main was believed to be the driver of the car involved in the robbery. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/41C6261BDE70D75888257187007BC638/$file/0410090.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is withdrawn. Is replaced by the Amended Opinion and Amended Dissent. The petition for rehearing is otherwise denied. The petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc will be accepted. This issue is one of first impression in our circuit. It is an issue of first impression in any federal circuit and the vast majority of state courts.1 A The dissent points to only two states whose supreme courts have addressed this issue: Maine and California. It is squarely presented. Facts Scott was arrested in Nevada on state charges of drug possession and released on his own recognizance. Scott was required to sign a form stating that he agreed to comply with certain conditions. Among the conditions was consent to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/04/02-6340.htm">02-6340 -- CUMMINGS V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. -- 04/28/2004<BR></A><BR> Asserting that the court should have directed a verdict in their favor based on the evidence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA1LTY2NDNfc28ucGRm/05-6643_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2001/98-8930.man.html">FUGATE V. HEAD (8/16/2001, NO. 98-8930)<BR></A><BR> BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2001/98-8930.man.html">FUGATE V. HEAD (8/16/2001, NO. 98-8930)<BR></A><BR> BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-2978_018.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Taryll Miller was convicted of distributing cocaine and sentenced to 300 months' imprisonment. He contends that statements he made to the police should have been suppressed as involuntary. Miller was twice given Miranda warnings before saying anything. That conclusion is not clearly erroneous. There is no factual inconsistency: the judge concluded that the threat had been made at the police station but not earlier. If there is legal inconsistency. Miller is the beneficiary. Because the judge should have allowed all of the statements to be admitted into evidence. Implying an adversarial stance as the police told him he had every right to do the natural consequence was immediate custody and prosecution for Miller and his girlfriend. Miller chose to pledge cooperation and both were left at liberty. Miller was not prosecuted until after he reneged on his pledge to help the investigation. Is a common one. This is the real choice many suspects face whether or not the police lay it out it in so many words. If the police have good ground for holding the mother. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/04/01-6308.htm">01-6308 -- DARKS V. MULLIN -- 04/11/2003<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2003/013234p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The District Court granted summary judgment for the City because there was no genuine issue of material fact and concluded that deliberate indifference by city policymakers had not been demonstrated. The District Court also granted summary judgment for Stewart and Caffey because it concluded that the 2 Appellants' federal claim was barred by a prior state judgment. We will affirm. Was at the residence of Angela Morris. Morris dialed </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May1994/94a0701p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Its passengers were thrown or jumped into the sea. Were transferred to the York County Prison on June 7. The York County Prison is located in the Middle District of Pennsylvania where many of the detainees. Filed claims for asylum which were rejected. Pan claimed that he was persecuted and has a well founded fear of future persecution by the Chinese government. At the hospital where the child was born. She was forced to undergo sterilization. The Pans were also ordered to pay heavy fines. Because the Pans were unable to pay the full amount. One child policy was not. Are or in the future may be applicants for withholding of deportation from and/or for asylum in the United States. In whole or in part because they have a clear probability (for withholding of deportation) or well founded fear (for asylum) of persecution on account of coerced population control policies of the PRC. The court reasoned that the nationwide scope of the requested class was inconsistent with the statutory limitations for judicial review. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0262p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiff Christopher Turner appeals the district court's order denying his motion for summary judgment and granting Defendants' summary judgment motion as to his claims under 42 U.S.C. з 1983 that (a) he was unconstitutionally detained in the City of Taylor jail for four days without being presented to a magistrate for arraignment. (b) he was subject to excessive force and denied medical treatment during his incarceration. The district court's orders are AFFIRMED. The officers later learned that the silver handgun was actually an inoperable BB gun. Plaintiff was asked about his physical condition. He indicated that he is HIV positive and an asthmatic. Plaintiff also stated that he was currently suffering pain in his chest and right arm. Plaintiff was then placed in a cell. It was determined on January 7 that Plaintiff would be charged with domestic violence. Plaintiff was told that he would be taken to court. Assuring Plaintiff that everything was okay. Plaintiff claims that he was not permitted to make any telephone calls during the entire period of his incarceration. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1643.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was on brief for appellant.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1997/97a1718p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arguing that he was indicted under the wrong subsection of 18 U.S.C. Because we find that indictment under subsection (1) of the statute was not erroneous. We will affirm the conviction. Because the president of the company he victimized was visually impaired. We will vacate the sentence. The district court may conduct further factfinding to determine whether the company itself was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/07/021694P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The school is a part of a complex that spans Lewis. The individual plaintiffs are parents whose children were involved in the incident that led to the preliminary injunction. Waddle is the Chief Juvenile Officer for the Second Judicial Circuit in Missouri. Alleging that these defendants were harassing and intimidating Heartland. The case was pending when. The removal was without notice to Heartland. Authorities had ex parte probable cause state court orders to remove only about seventy five of the students who were taken into custody. As well as orders for approximately forty children who no longer lived at Heartland and for four others who were over the age of eighteen. That is. Which evidently was inaccurate by October when he decided that all of the children living at Heartland needed to be removed immediately. The students were confined by juvenile authorities. They were given a copy of a letter from a juvenile The Heartland parents were added as plaintiffs on February 14. Lewis County were not included in Waddle's notice of appeal. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9E57C1EF6508BFE988256EAD005AF18C/$file/0310001.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We conclude that з 2422(b) is not facially unconstitutional as overbroad and vague. We are also unpersuaded by Dhingra's multiple evidentiary and sentencing challenges. Although Dhingra and the victim's computers were both located in California. The conversations were sent through America Online's computer server in Virginia and therefore traveled across state boundaries via a means of interstate commerce. 2 America Online Instant Messenger is an Internet service that enables users to chat in real time dialogue </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/04/046001P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was nondischargeable. Seven children were under the age of 18. Judge Kennon found that Gwendolyn was capable of earning net income of approximately $1. 654.60 per month and that Jerry was capable of earning net income of approximately $1. Judge Kennon found that Gwendolyn was entitled to lump sum alimony. That Jerry did not have the ability to pay it. Jerry claims the award of lump sum alimony is not in the nature of support. Was in fact part of the parties' The Honorable Richard D. Found that the debt was nondischargeable. Giving due regard to the opportunity of the bankruptcy court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.2 We review the legal conclusions of the bankruptcy court de novo.3 A bankruptcy court's finding that an award in a dissolution proceeding is in the nature of alimony is a factual finding that we will not disturb unless such finding is clearly erroneous.4 Gourley v. 595 (2nd Cir. 2002) (holding that the reviewing court applies the clearly erroneous standard when an appellant appeals the trial court's determination that a debt is in the nature of support under 11 U.S.C. з 523(a)(5). 4 3 DISCUSSION This adversary proceeding is a bit unusual for two reasons. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052848np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will deny the petition for review of the first order by the BIA denying the request to reopen Brienza's immigration proceedings. We will dismiss the petition for review of the latter order because we lack jurisdiction. He started dealing drugs in late 1991 and was arrested in March 1992 as he attempted to sell a kilogram of cocaine. Brienza was charged 2 with and pleaded guilty to two counts of possession of a controlled dangerous substance with the intent to distribute in violation of New Jersey law. He cooperated with law enforcement authorities and was favorably treated by the state court system. He was taken into custody. Brienza was released from custody and returned to his home in New Jersey. He received notice that he was to surrender to INS custody on August 13. Which concluded that application of the IIRIRA's repeal of з 212(c) to aliens who pleaded guilty was impermissibly retroactive. They continued to live in New York without any difficulty until Brienza was arrested in April 2004 for a violation of state law related to workman compensation documentation. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Feb2003/012312.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Shannon Schieber was raped and murdered in her second floor apartment at 251 S. 23rd Street. The District Court's order denying summary judgment will be reversed. This matter will be remanded with instructions to enter summary judgment in favor of Officers Woods and Scherff. I. The following account of the relevant facts reflects the undisputed evidence in the summary judgment record except where the contrary is expressly noted. Were watching television when they heard a noise that made Greeley think that Schieber was in a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/05/032007P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. FACTS This is a public corruption case in which Joseph Biernat and Thomas Martin were accused of trading $2. This fund was designed to subsidize member contractors so that they could bid competitively with non union contractors. One of these residences was owned by Joseph Biernat and occupied by his mother. Agents in a car approached Biernat as he was on foot. Agent Sean Boylan ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1270.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Spellman Professional Corporation</U> were on brief. This claim was dismissed by the district court on defendants' motion for summary judgment after finding that there were no genuine issues of material fact in dispute. Alwyn reported to the Concord Police Department that two of her children were missing. Officer Duval was dispatched to the Alwyns' home. Asked the Alwyns whether he could search the house because </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B0C78180017FFF4B88256A41005B2513/$file/9835825.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He is seeking relief from the judgment of conviction entered against him on June 2. Zichko alleges substantively in his habeas petition that he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his 5494 attorney failed to consult with him about appealing his initial conviction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. зз 1291 and 2253. (2) that his guilty plea was not knowingly. Threatened him and his family by advising that he would have to vigorously cross examine Zichko's daughter. ] [and] [n]o appeal was filed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3EBFF0C18A46AA6C882570E600792EAF/$file/0256648.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Law enforcement officers must have probable cause to believe that the parolee resides at the house to be searched. While this appeal was pending. It is sufficient for us to conclude that. It was not clearly established that any suspicion of wrong doing on the part of the parolee was needed. Are as follows.1 On February 20. Janae We recognize that some of the material facts are contradicted by the officers' deposition testimony and declarations. Was released on parole from state prison. Jamerson was required to consent that his person. Motley testified that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/94opinions/94-5151.html">ISHIDA V. U.S.<BR></A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043428np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will affirm the district court's denial of the writ. Officers from the City of Dover Police Department were dispatched to an apartment in response to an </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2284.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> 2) the Government's good faith search for the juvenile's records in this case satisfied 5032's requirement that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDAzLTEzOTRfc28ucGRm/03-1394_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDAzLTEzOTRfc28ucGRm/03-1394_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDAzLTEzOTRfc28ucGRm/03-1394_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDAzLTEzOTRfc28ucGRm/03-1394_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0927EAED1DB2BE5B88256ED90068E11A/$file/0310001.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is amended as follows: on slip opinion page 7447. The factual difference between the two acts is that. The factual difference between the two acts is that. The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED. We conclude that з 2422(b) is not facially unconstitutional as overbroad and vague. We are also unpersuaded by Dhingra's multiple evidentiary and sentencing challenges. The victim stated that she </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-3968_008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Charles Johnson was charged in a two count indictment with production of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. з 2251(a)1 and (e).2 Mr. If such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed. If that visual depiction was produced using materials that have been mailed. This section (continued...) 2 No. 06 3968 3 son filed a motion to suppress certain evidence on the ground that his consent to the search was involuntary. He also claimed that his waiver of his Miranda rights was involuntary. Johnson was sentenced to concurrent terms of life imprisonment. Images of this young girl had been found on several individuals' computers and were labeled with Jane Doe's actual name. She stated that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4DF3231EB39B202588256E5A00707B17/$file/9835825.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> He is seeking relief from the judgment of conviction entered against him on June 2. Zichko alleges substantively in his habeas petition that he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his 5494 attorney failed to consult with him about appealing his initial conviction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. зз 1291 and 2253. (2) that his guilty plea was not knowingly. Threatened him and his family by advising that he would have to vigorously cross examine Zichko's daughter. ] [and] [n]o appeal was filed. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DAEC0F3D7F6C5B7488256F6B007897F0/$file/0215475.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> WL (9th Cir. 2004) (unpublished disposition). *This appeal was withdrawn from submission pending the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller El v. This Opinion was circulated to the panel on October 23. 1 we hold the state court's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTkyNzRfb3BuZGlzc2VudC5wZGY=/02-9274_opndissent.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Fifth searches of S.C. and the second search of T.W. were unlawful. I also agree that the denial of class certification was well within the district court's discretion. The concerns animating our prior rulings in this area should be only heightened when the privacy interests of emotionally troubled children are at stake. Of adolescents who have never been charged with a crime. They were unlawful. I agree with the majority that the proper framework for analysis of the strip searches at issue is the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/09/00-8034.htm">00-8034 -- MARTINEZ V. UPHOFF -- 09/18/2001<BR></A><BR> Were with him on the briefs)for Plaintiffs Appellants. <p> Richard Rideout. 1291. <p> Corporal Martinez was a Wyoming Department of Corrections Officer at the Wyoming State Penitentiary in Rawlings. He was attacked and murdered by three inmates who were attempting to escape. <p> All defendants are sued in their individual capacities. Each was an employee of the Department of Corrections at the time of Martinez's death.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-3786.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was sentenced to a total of 108 months' imprisonment. Arguing that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective. Holding that he procedurally defaulted his claim because he could have raised it on direct appeal. We nonetheless affirm the district court's denial of his з 2255 motion because Richardson has failed to show that his trial counsel was ineffective. That </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/03a0282p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Filed a civil rights action alleging that Weaver was arrested without probable cause. That the Officers were deliberately indifferent to the serious medical needs of Weaver. We find that Weaver's Fourth and Eighth Amendment rights were not violated. Was on patrol in Oliver Springs. Shadoan was aware that Futtrell was having trouble with some black men. Thus knew that Futtrell was not at home. The vehicle did not have a license plate. Have dark tinted windows with a temporary tag behind the rear window. Shadoan thought the temporary tag was expired. Believing that the tag was expired. That the window tint was too dark. That there may have been criminal activity at the Futtrell residence. Weaver inquired as to why he was being stopped and Shadoan indicated it was because of the car's expired tag. Weaver responded that his tag was not expired. Pointing out that the alleged 7 was in fact a 9. Were at the Futtrell residence. That the two were now on their way back to Oak Ridge. That the location of Futtrell's residence was inconsistent with this story. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200613035.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The subject line for that group was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200516734.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Plaintiffs claim their constitutional rights were violated when they were subjected at the Jail to </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/07/973295P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Wayne King was seventy seven years old. The petition was supported by a letter from Clarksville physician Jack T. Patterson stating that King was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/04/976098P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The bankruptcy court in this case held that certain debts owed to the debtor's former spouse are nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. з 523(a)(5) and (a)(15). BACKGROUND Michael ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=06&date=01&year=04">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200312500.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Nancy Corley were employed in the licensing unit of the Florida Department of Children and Families (the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/963107P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Paul was then sixteen years old and had been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD). Paul was skipping school. No significant action was taken until March 22. A state district court judge ruled that there was probable cause to support the CHIPS petition. A CHIPS hearing was held on April 7. Who were represented by counsel. King retaining legal custody.3 The matter was continued for 30 days. Was placed in a foster home on April 13. A follow up hearing was held on May 10. Paul was discharged from the Wilson Center and returned home on June 18. The county attorney's motion to dismiss the CHIPS petition was granted on July 27. Kindem erroneously states in her affidavit that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971665.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Were married in 1992 in Florida. At the time Sean filed suit Marc was staying with him in North Carolina. Alleging that Marc was a habitual resident of France. While her motion was pending. Who had been living in France but was in North Carolina. The state court then denied Berengere's motion to have Marc returned to France. Finding that Sean's retention of Marc while his suit was pending did not amount to a violation of the Hague Convention or the ICARA. The district court decided that the action was a parallel proceeding to the state custody proceeding Sean filed in 1995 and thus found that judicial administration warranted that it abstain from adjudicating the controversy. Berengere alleges that Sean kidnaped Marc and brought him to the United States in violation of her rights of custody under French law and a French court order awarding her temporary custody of Marc. 2 Under exceptional circumstances. Before determining that abstention is warranted. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/july97/96-4027.wpd.html">BARRIE V. GRAND COUNTY, UTAH<BR></A><BR> Jurisdiction was based on 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988. Named as defendants were the following: Grand County. The cause therefore was ordered submitted without oral argument. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19965144.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The district court found that officials of the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services were failing to furnish Medicaid assistance with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0345p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This court is again faced with the same claims. Having considered the arguments of the parties regarding the two claims that are before us. The petition was amended on September 16. This court's review of the state court's decision is governed by the standards set forth in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Because factual determinations by state courts are entitled to a presumption of correctness. We will describe the factual circumstances surrounding the murder for which House was convicted by quoting from the Tennessee Supreme Court's opinion denying him relief in his direct appeal: The victim of the homicide was Mrs. Muncey was in her late twenties. Her children were about eight and ten years old at the time of her death on July 13. In March 1985 appellant Paul Gregory House was released from a prison in Utah and moved to the rural community in which the Muncey family lived. Which was located about two miles from the Muncey home. He was permitted to drive his mother's car from time to time. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/12/02-1407.htm">02-1407 -- U.S. V. MCGRAW -- 12/02/2003<BR></A><BR> Told the undercover officer he was interested in having sexual contact with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0955n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> This is an interlocutory appeal from the district court's decision that defendant social worker Williams Ash was not entitled to Eleventh Amendment or qualified immunity from a civil rights suit filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. з 1983. The facts recounted below are drawn strictly from the complaint. David and Melody Smith are the parents of two minor children and the legal custodians of another minor child. Defendant Judy Williams Ash is an employee of Hamilton County Job and Family Services in Ohio. Plaintiffs have custody of Malake through a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974881.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were married in April 1991. They have one child. She discovered that Ryan did not have a fever. Notice of both the temporary protective order and the final protective 2 order hearing was served on Bostic. Following a full hearing on the matter at which Bostic was present with counsel and had the opportunity to testify. Did allow for Bostic to have visitation from January 29 through February 2. The Order did not provide that Bostic was to surrender possession of any firearms he may have otherwise legally possessed and it did not contain any notice that the mere possession of a firearm while subject to the Order would constitute a violation of any law. The Order did notify that violation of the Order itself </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511258.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Ali's extraordinary motion for a new trial on his child molestation offense was granted by a Georgia state court. As was the State of Georgia's motion to nolle prosse charges. To two counts of child molestation and was sentenced to five years' probation on each count. This sentence was imposed under Georgia's First Offender Act. Alleging that he was removable under 8 U.S.C. з 1227(a)(1)(A). As an alien who was inadmissible at the time of the adjustment of his status because (1) he had been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Because Although the functions of the INS were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security by the Homeland Security Act of 2002. We will continue to use the abbreviation </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/47DC82E3005637AB882569F300627E4F/$file/9855807.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kerry Sanders was extradited from California to New York in October 1993 and incarcerated in a New York state prison until October 1995. Kerry Sanders would not have been arrested. Factual Background </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/23A918C3155260E288256E5A00707B1B/$file/9855807.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is hereby recalled. 2001 is withdrawn. Kerry Sanders was extradited from California to New York in October 1993 and incarcerated in a New York state prison until October 1995. Kerry Sanders would not have been arrested. Violations of rights protected by state law.1 The defendants in this appeal are the City. Factual Background </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A50F3AE65D81C4888256B790060D484/$file/0035596.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The motion for reconsideration of petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED except as the opinion is hereby amended. Is amended as follows: 1) In the citations following the first sentence of the third paragraph of section II of the Discussion section. 3961 makes it </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/01/02-3210.htm">02-3210 -- BROWN V. WARDEN, SPRINGFIELD MEDICAL CENTER FOR FEDERAL PRISONERS -- 01/02/2003<BR></A><BR> The district court dismissed Brown's petition because he was no longer in state custody as required by 28 U.S.C. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FBB2B11482D8190A88256B26005C78E0/$file/0035596.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She testified at a competency hearing at which the defendant was not present. The child victim's hearsay statements about the incident of abuse were introduced through other witnesses who heard the statements. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Rodrigo Gandarela was tried in 1994 on charges of Rape in the First Degree. He was 16965 acquitted on the Rape charge and convicted on the other three charges. 1 was four years old when Gandarela allegedly molested her. Shannon S.2 was babysitting A.V. and A.V.'s elder sisters. A.V.'s mother was out of the home. The three older girls were in the bathroom for a time attempting to pull a loose baby tooth out of Lisa's mouth. While petitioner and A.V. were elsewhere in the house. Christina testified that she heard A.V. state that she was scared and saw A.V. move away from Gandarela. Christina's testimony was similar. 1 In an attempt to preserve some degree of privacy for the child victim. We refer to her only by her initials. 2 We are also using initials for the child witnesses because their last names are not material. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062215np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Dismissing this case on the grounds that it is moot. Even though the order dismissing the action succinctly described why the case was moot. The facts of the complaint are not complex and are well known to the parties. As it happened the Tuckers were indigent for purposes of obtaining the evaluation but they each qualified for a county subsidy to help pay for its cost. An organization called the Court Conciliation and Evaluation Service ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/06/02-6340.htm">02-6340 -- CUMMINGS V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP. -- 06/02/2004<BR></A><BR> Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9B92D03700596A9188256A42005B2814/$file/9855807.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Is hereby recalled. 2001 is withdrawn. Kerry Sanders was extradited from California to New York in October 1993 and incarcerated in a New York state prison until October 1995. Kerry Sanders would not have been arrested. Violations of rights protected by state law.1 The defendants in this appeal are the City. Factual Background </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3B7A13D45B49D10C88256E5A00707D92/$file/0035596.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> She testified at a competency hearing at which the defendant was not present. The child victim's hearsay statements about the incident of abuse were introduced through other witnesses who heard the statements. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Rodrigo Gandarela was tried in 1994 on charges of Rape in the First Degree. He was 16965 acquitted on the Rape charge and convicted on the other three charges. 1 was four years old when Gandarela allegedly molested her. Shannon S.2 was babysitting A.V. and A.V.'s elder sisters. A.V.'s mother was out of the home. The three older girls were in the bathroom for a time attempting to pull a loose baby tooth out of Lisa's mouth. While petitioner and A.V. were elsewhere in the house. Christina testified that she heard A.V. state that she was scared and saw A.V. move away from Gandarela. Christina's testimony was similar. 1 In an attempt to preserve some degree of privacy for the child victim. We refer to her only by her initials. 2 We are also using initials for the child witnesses because their last names are not material. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9830F0DE2673A0288256E5A00707A4C/$file/9855807.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kerry Sanders was extradited from California to New York in October 1993 and incarcerated in a New York state prison until October 1995. Kerry Sanders would not have been arrested. Factual Background </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114273.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Robinson was convicted in the Circuit Court of St. Was sentenced to death on the murder conviction. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0195p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> A Kentucky resident who was stabbed to death at the </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0292p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was convicted on 27 counts of a 28 count indictment that charged him with the production. He was ordered to forfeit items and equipment utilized in committing those offenses. Contending that з2251(b) is unconstitutional as applied to him because the government failed to establish a sufficient nexus between his alleged activities and interstate or foreign commerce. He told them to take pictures of each other's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2001/00-10175.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MARIN-NAVARETTE (3/23/2001, NO. 00-10175)<BR></A><BR> Was in its custody for driving with no proof of insurance and no driver's license. Marin Navarette disclosed that he was a citizen of Mexico. The district court sentenced Marin Navarette to 70 months imprisonment followed by three years supervised release.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/june97/96-4016.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. MEACHAM<BR></A><BR> (2) there was insufficient evidence that he acted with a dominant purpose of engaging in criminal sexual activity when he transported his minor relative in interstate commerce. Was twelve years old when she testified at the trial. One occurring when she was seven or eight and the other on which the charge was based when she was ten. The witness stated that she did not say anything to defendant after the first incident because she was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2001/00-10175.man.html">UNITED STATES V. MARIN-NAVARETTE (3/23/2001, NO. 00-10175)<BR></A><BR> Was in its custody for driving with no proof of insurance and no driver's license. Marin Navarette disclosed that he was a citizen of Mexico. The district court sentenced Marin Navarette to 70 months imprisonment followed by three years supervised release.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011541.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> (3) the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there are genuine issues of material fact still in dispute. Bryant's employment is covered by a collective bargaining agreement between Bell Atlantic and the CWA. An employee was assigned one Red Letter Day per week. When the policy was first implemented. Employees were required to complete one overtime assignment on their Red Letter Day after their regular assigned jobs were completed. Protested the Red Letter Day policy in a grievance arguing that it was difficult for him to work week night overtime and meet his child care responsibilities. Allegedly refused this The Red Letter Day policy was unsuccessfully grieved by the CWA pursuant to the grievance/arbitration procedure of the collective bargaining agreement. The CWA took the position that Bell Atlantic did not have the right to require overtime work in this particular manner. The arbitrator concluded that the Red Letter Day policy was a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19972319.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We must determine whether an attorney who provided no defense at the guilt or penalty phase was ineffective in defending a young drug dealer. Who was an alcohol and drug abuser. When relief was denied in district court. We VACATE the denial of habeas relief as to the death sentence and REMAND to the district court for an evidentiary hearing to determine if petitioner is entitled to habeas relief because of ineffective assistance of counsel at the sentencing phase. Who was unemployed but a drug dealer and For factual completeness to address the issues on appeal in our independent review. We include facts from affidavits and expert reports that were exhibits at the 3.850 proceeding but were not part of the record before the district court. It was evident that we needed to review them. The exhibits were filed as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2011.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We also hold that the defendants have established that the district court plainly erred when sentencing these defendants. Which we have consolidated for disposition. Kendall Lipscomb was a correctional officer who only had <hr> approximately six months of experience at the time of the incident. Duran was ordered to leave the dining hall. Where they were joined by Lieutenants Fuller and Serrata. The camera either malfunctioned during the incident or was never turned on. So there is no tape of the event. Convinced that he was about to be beaten. Said that he would not allow his other hand <hr> to be cuffed until the video camera was turned on. Duran was lying on the ground face first with both hands behind his back. Who were standing on opposite sides of Mr. The defendants' version of the story is considerably different. Officers Fuller and Butler were on either side of Mr. Duran continued to defy the officers' orders when the dogs were brought out. Duran was. Fighting with the officers to an extent that use of force on the part of the officers was reasonable and necessary. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-1049.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> At which counsel for both parties were present. That petitioner's failure to object at the hearing to the proposed transfer precludes him from obtaining relief on appeal. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2032.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief. Was admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident in 1981. He was convicted of raping a child and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment. Rivera argued that he was not subject to removal proceedings because he is a United States citizen a status he claimed derives from his father's naturalization in April 1981.<A HREF= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0797n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Kellogg Kellogg's daughter revealed that </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/11/03-3084.htm">03-3084 -- YISRAEL V. RUSSELL -- 11/28/2003<BR></A><BR> The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Yericho Yisrael. That it did have jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage. He asserts that the federal court was required to evaluate whether the Kansas state court had jurisdiction to enter its orders in the divorce proceedings and that the jurisdictional issue is separate and apart from the merits of the divorce orders. Its additional rulings were void. Which were filed with court permission. <p> <center> <u>Standards of Review</u> </center> <p> We review de novo a district court's decision to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. <em>Kenmen Eng'g v. Because plaintiff is representing himself on appeal. His pleadings will be liberally construed. <em>Haines v. If a plaintiff could have raised a constitutional issue in a direct appeal of the state court order. Because the relief he seeks from the federal court is an order setting aside the state court orders. His federal claims are inextricably intertwined with those orders. <em>See</em> <em>Kenmen Eng'g</em>. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033614np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. з 1291. We will affirm. Who are familiar with the facts. We will not recite them except as necessary to the discussion. Was made applicable to civil cases in Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. The Court distilled the three requirements for the application of the Younger Abstention Doctrine: (1) the existence of an ongoing state proceeding which is judicial in nature. The Court has also made clear that the state proceeding need not be ongoing at the time the federal complaint is before the court as long as the plaintiff had an adequate opportunity to resolve the federal issue in a state proceeding. The test for Younger Abstention is met with respect to Appellant McDaniels. The state proceeding against him was judicial in nature. Both issues were adjudicated in New Jersey Superior Court under New Jersey Court Rules. This matter is ongoing for purposes of Younger Abstention under Huffman because McDaniels could have appealed the termination of his parental rights first to the Appellate Division and then to the New Jersey Supreme Court. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3245_008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Finding that Yueng and San Kai were not credible and had not demonstrated either past persecution or a reasonable fear of future persecution. Because the IJ's adverse credibility finding is speculative and not supported by substantial evidence. Her adult son San Kai Kwok (who was a minor when he and Yueng applied for asylum in 2000). Her husband Ho Kwok are from Tingjiang. She is illiterate. After San Kai was born. Yueng testified that in October 1999 she learned she was pregnant. She specifically testified that the month in question was February 2000. Attempted to clarify the timeline and asked Yueng whether she was certain that all of the events in question occurred in February 2000. She affirmed that she was sure. So I have a slip of tongue. Two of whom have two children each. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM5MDMtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3903-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The defendant argues that the sentence erroneously fails to account for the lesser sentence defendant presumably would have received in one of the The Honorable Louis F. Mejia contends that the court erred in declining to reduce his sentence to account for the lesser sentence he presumably 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 would have received in one of the thirteen districts that use a </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=06&date=01&year=97">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/07/064013P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Arguing that the false statement that formed the basis of his indictment should have been suppressed. Which the officers believed to have resulted from a gang initiation rite. Among them was Special Agent Chris Cantrell who had worked as an immigration officer for 11 years including five years as a border patrol agent. He was also trained in investigating ethnic gangs and in interviewing undocumented aliens and other foreign nationals. Six undocumented aliens from Mexico were identified and arrested during these searches. They were also looking for fresh signs of gang activity. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/051411np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> We will deny the petition.1 Belizaire. Belizaire was convicted in New York for attempted possession of a handgun. He was again convicted in New York for attempted possession of a revolver in 2002. He also asserted that he is a national of the United States based on his naturalization application and registration for the Selective Service. The judicial district in which Belizaire was in custody at the time he filed the petition. While his appeal was pending. We have determined that such pending appeals are converted to petitions for review under 8 U.S.C. з 1252. Because the matter is fully briefed and ripe for disposition. We will deny the Government's motion to transfer this matter to the Second Circuit. 2 1 judge (IJ) rejected Belizaire's claims of citizenship and nationality. A lawful permanent resident child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a citizen when: (1) at least one parent of the child is a citizen. (2) the child is under the age of eighteen. It is undisputed that Belizaire's parents were living and married at all relevant times. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/06/051985P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Juvenile officers are judicial employees. Who are supervised by the juvenile court or circuit court judges. It must designate a single state agency (SSA) that will </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2149.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> P.A. were on brief for appellants. Hewey and Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon were on brief for appellees L. Jr. with whom Thompson & Bowie was on brief for appellee Town of Winthrop. This is an appeal from the district court's dismissal of a complaint filed by Alfred and Gale Hasenfus. The facts alleged in the complaint are as follows. Jamie was a 14 year old student in the 8th grade of the Winthrop Middle School. Jamie was reprimanded by her teacher. No one from the school staff was supervising the locker room. Spent several weeks in the hospital and was left with permanent impairments. One was that Jamie had been raped when she was 13 and later underwent the further trauma of testifying against the rapist. School officials were aware of the rape. Was later counseled by the school nurse and school guidance counselor. Carlo Kempton knew or should have known of the rape and should not have sent Jamie </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=08&date=01&year=96">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511843.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Was unreasonable. The purpose of the message board was to allow adults with children to meet other adults for the purposes of arranging and having sex with children. Scott indicated that he wanted to have sex with Agent Paganucci's six year old boy and four year old girl. Scott explained that he had a niece that he was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=10&date=01&year=01">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-5050.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> With him on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief was Tink D. Because the Court of Federal Claims correctly determined that Murakami was not entitled to compensation under the Act. Or fifth column activity committed by Japanese Americans were ever established. Was a United States citizen born and raised in Los Angeles and nearby Terminal Island. He and his family were relocated by the Government to the Manzanar internment camp in the desert near Bishop. Who was also from Los Angeles. pregnant. Arthur Murakami's individual exclusion order was lifted when he was informed that he was </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/006594.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Alleging that she had no notice that the statute under which she was convicted applied to her conduct and that the statute as interpreted is unconstitutionally vague. Crawley argues that the district court misinterpreted the tolling provision of 28 U.S.C. з 2244(d)(2) by failing to toll the statute of limitations for the period during which her petition was pending in the United States Supreme Court for writ of certiorari to review the South Carolina Supreme Court's denial of her state habeas corpus application. Because we agree with the district court that 28 U.S.C. з 2244(d)(2) did not toll the one year limitations period while Crawley's petition for writ of certiorari was pending. I. The operative facts in this matter are not disputed. Crawley was charged with </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/06/013211P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Darrell Lee Miller was convicted of abusive sexual contact with a minor less than twelve years of age in violation of 18 U.S.C. з 1153 and з 2244(a)(2) & (c). Was sentenced to 63 months imprisonment. Alleging that there was insufficient evidence to support the The Honorable Thomas M. I. Miller is a Native American who lived on a Nebraska Indian reservation at all times relevant to this case. Miller was indicted in January 2001. Whom we will refer to as </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/March2004/024540p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Judgment was entered against Hayward after a jury convicted him of violating 18 U.S.C. з 2423(a) (transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity). He was sentenced to 15 years in prison. Was ordered to make restitution in the amount of $12. We will affirm Hayward's conviction. We will remand the case 1 to the District Court for re sentencing. PCC and other teams were invited to take part in the World Cheerleading Association's </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1189.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Were on brief for appellee.</SPAN> <BR WP= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/10/99-1373.htm">99-1373 -- HOLLAND V. HARRINGTON -- 10/19/2001<BR></A><BR> Throwing them to the ground where they were kicked and beaten. Together with defendant Davis.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NzZfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5876_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Winners have yet to be declared in an election for two seats in the Albany County. Along with two candidates who have since dropped out of the case. The district court should have dismissed the voters' suit for lack of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 subject matter jurisdiction in light of earlier state court litigation over the absentee ballots. This court should vacate the district court's preliminary injunction because the voters have not sufficiently established that their constitutional claim is likely to succeed. Although we are unpersuaded by the Board's arguments. I. BACKGROUND This appeal is the latest installment in litigation that began in 2003 over elections for the Albany County Legislature. By then it was too late to hold the November 2003 election in accordance with the substitute plan. Which would have required voters to file a new request for such ballots. The election was close: according to the complaint. All four candidates petitioned the New York Supreme Court in Albany County to have various absentee ballots invalidated. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/03/01-1186.htm">01-1186 -- MONROE V. OWENS -- 03/21/2002<BR></A><BR> Although we adhere to the principle that unsupported conclusory allegations are insufficient to state a claim. <u>See<em></u> <u></em>Hall v. We have reviewed appellants' complaints. We analyze the propriety of the district court's dismissals of all of the appellants' complaints under Rule 12(b)(6) individually. <p> <center><strong>II</strong></center> <p> The first case in the consolidated cases on appeal was filed July 20. As district court case 00 CV 1456.<a href= </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/08/031629P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Edwards determined from his dispatcher that Karen Cash lived at the address in question and that there was a valid arrest warrant outstanding for Cash for violating a no contact order. Funaro told her that there was an outstanding warrant for her arrest. Who was present at the residence. Edwards noted that Cash was extremely nervous and continually interrupted herself when speaking to the officers. 2 After the officers had been at Cash's residence for about ten minutes. He was concerned that because Cash was allegedly involved with large amounts of drugs. She denied that it was marijuana. Only its legal conclusion that the protective sweep was justified. The defendant emerged from the basement and was taken into custody. One officer then entered the basement </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/06/002908P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Martin was a resident engineer at DaimlerChrysler's Assembly Plant in Fenton. Martin received poor performance reviews for two consecutive years and was terminated by DaimlerChrysler in June 1998. DaimlerChrysler's stated reasons for terminating Martin were poor performance and attendance. Pain and suffering or any alleged damages and injuries [she] claim[ed] in [her] Complaint to have suffered. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8140573A12EC20AF88256C76007C8010/$file/0255079.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> The only other Circuit to have addressed this question. The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is an international treaty among the United States and fifty other countries.1 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Despite the forceful connotation of words like </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/08/002856P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> I. Appellant is the grandmother of minor Lauren Kenney and the mother of Chris Kenney. Which indicated that the child was thought to be kidnaped by a parent or relative and was last seen with Appellant. The station broadcast this report: </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/09/97-1287.htm">97-1287 -- U.S. V. MCVEIGH -- 09/08/1998<BR></A><BR> McVeigh ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Feb1996/96a1253p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Hutchinson was a member of the panel which heard this appeal. Holding that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker Feldman doctrine and also that it should abstain under Younger v. We will accordingly reverse and remand for further proceedings. I. FOCUS is a Pittsburgh. Pennsylvania unincorporated association consisting of some fifty birth and foster parents whose goal is to make the Allegheny County Children and Youth Services ( </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/0219.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Circuit Judge: The government takes this interlocutory appeal to challenge the district court's in limine determination that six statements made to others by the missing victim in a federal kidnapping and murder case are inadmissible. I conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding that the statements are excludable under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 because their probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Judge Traxler has written a separate opinion concurring in the judgment to affirm and concluding that the statements are inadmissible under Rule 804(b)(6)'s forfeiture by wrongdoing exception to the hearsay rule. He concludes that the O.J. statements are not excludable under Rule 403. That the defendant engaged in wrongdoing that was intended to. Lentz (Lentz) is charged with kidnapping and murdering his ex wife. The government is seeking the death penalty on count 1 and has filed the required notice. </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD> <TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/024192.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR> JEFFCOAT Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Co op. 1995) were crimes of violence for the purposes of the United States Sentencing Guidelines з 2K2.1(a)(2) (2000). The issue on appeal is whether the district court properly considered Jeffcoat's prior convictions as crimes of violence under the sentencing guidelines. 1 were </TD> </TR> <TR CLASS="swhit"> <TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.