FindLaw News Law Offices of Randy R. McCalla, P.A. Attorneys Olathe Kansas

News

Crime Sports Supreme Court Top Headlines

Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure Sports Law

Criminal Law & Procedure

[02/03] US v. Mahin
In a prosecution on two counts of possessing a firearm or ammunition while subject to a domestic violence protective order in violation of 18 USC section 922(g)(8), the judgment of conviction is: 1) affirmed in part, where the statute and its application to the defendant's firearm use the same day he was served with a protective order did not violate the Second Amendment under the intermediate scrutiny standard; and 2) reversed in part and remanded for resentencing, where it was plain error to convict and sentence the defendant on two separate counts for the simultaneous possession of a firearm and ammunition under section 922(g)(8).

[02/03] US v. Culbertson
In a prosecution in which the defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to import 100 grams or more of heroin and five kilograms or more of cocaine, the case is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate the judgment of conviction, where: 1) there was an inadequate factual basis for the defendant's guilty plea with respect to the quantity of drugs for which he was responsible; and 2) the district court's error in accepting the defendant's plea was not harmless.

[02/03] US v. Leahy
In a sentencing challenge brought by a defendant convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, the district court's 10-year sentence is affirmed, where: 1) the district court's application of enhancements under the sentencing guidelines and its inclusion of criminal history points was procedurally reasonable; and 2) the sentence, although the maximum possible, was substantively reasonable, as the district court articulated a plausible sentencing rationale and imposed a sentence within the range of reasonable outcomes.

[02/02] US v. Rivera-Santana
In a sentencing challenge after the appellant was convicted of illegal reentry into the United States after being removed for a conviction of an aggravated felony, the sentencing court's judgment order is affirmed, where: 1) two upward departures in the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, augmented by an upward variance of 90 months therefrom, were not procedurally unreasonable; and 2) the resulting sentence, which was the statutory maximum, was not substantively unreasonable.

[02/02] People v. Brents
In a prosecution for first-degree murder and other crimes which resulted in a conviction and death sentence, the judgment is reversed as to the sentence of death, and the jury's true finding on the kidnapping special circumstance allegation is stricken, where the jury was not properly instructed regarding the need to find an independent felonious purpose to kidnap the victim, but the convictions are otherwise upheld where: 1) hearsay statements were admissible under Evidence Code section 791(b) as prior consistent statements; 2) there was no abuse of discretion in the admission of a photograph of the victim's body; 3) the trial court did not violate Penal Code section 654's prohibition against multiple sentences for a single act or course of conduct by imposing a death sentence for the murder conviction and a consecutive 25-years-to-life term for the felony assault conviction; and 4) the trial court did not make multiple errors, so that the defendant's claim of cumulative prejudice necessarily failed.

[02/02] People v. Elliott
On appeal of the death sentence after conviction for crimes including first-degree murder with the special circumstance of murder during the commission of a robbery, the sentence is affirmed against numerous and various challenges on issues relating to: 1) pretrial procedures and jury selection; 2) the defendant's guilt; 3) the penalty imposed; and 4) the adequacy of the appellate record.

More...

Sports Law

[11/02] CBS Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission
In a petition for review of an order of defendant-FCC penalizing petitioner for broadcasting a fleeting nude image during the National Football League's Super Bowl halftime performance, petition is granted because defendant failed to acknowledge that its order reflected a policy change and improperly imposed a penalty on petitioner for violating a previously unannounced policy.

[04/28] Cedar Fair v. City of Santa Clara
In a petition for a writ of mandate pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Act) and pertaining to the allocation, in a term sheet, of a proposed site for a 49er stadium, judgment of the trial court denying petition is affirmed because term sheet did not constitute a project or a project approval within the meaning of the Act and, therefore, preparation of an environmental impact report was not required.

[04/01] Lopera v. Town of Coventry
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 dispute arising from a police search of team members after a heated match and with the consent of team coach, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where officers were entitled to qualified immunity and plaintiffs did not introduce sufficient evidence supporting a finding that the police engaged in racial discrimination.

[03/08] Equity in Athletics, Inc. v. Department of Education
In a lawsuit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. section 1681-88, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where plaintiff failed to offer any support for its numerous constitutional, statutory, and procedural claims.

[02/16] Rosencrans v. Dover Images, Inc.
In a tort action brought by a motorcyclist against operators of a motorcross track, alleging negligence, negligent training and supervision, and loss of consortium, summary judgment to defendant on all causes of action is reversed as to the gross negligence claim, but affirmed in all other respects.

[01/10] Eriksson v. Nunnink
In plaintiff-parents' suit for wrongful death and infliction of emotion distress against defendant, their deceased daughter's horse riding coach, claiming that defendant increased the risk of harm reasonably assumed by their daughter when defendant allowed their daughter to ride a horse that was unfit to ride because of prior falls and lack of practice and concealed this condition from the plaintiffs, trial court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment is reversed where: 1) as to primary assumption of risk, defendant failed to set forth facts in her separate statement of undisputed facts negating the plaintiffs' allegation that defendant increased the risk of injury to their daughter by allowing her to ride a horse that was unfit to ride because of prior falls and lack of practice; 2) defendant failed to meet her burden of production as it relates to the element of breach of duty; 3) with respect to express contractual assumption of risk, defendant failed to meet her burden of proof of production that she was not grossly negligent; 4) even if defendant met her initial burden, triable issues of fact exist as to duty, breach of duty, and gross negligence; and 5) with respect to causation, if defendant's undisputed statement of facts addressed the issue, the plaintiffs have demonstrated a triable issue of fact.

More...

Home || Firm Overview || Practice Area Overview || Attorney Profile || Resource Links || Contact Us || Legal News and Cases

The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.

Copyright © 2012 by Law Offices of Randy R. McCalla, P.A. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.