Skip navigation

Punch and Jurists: January 23, 2017

Issue PDF
Volume 24, Number 1

In this issue:

  1. U.S. v. Patrick, No. 15-2443 (7th Cir.) (842 F.3d 540) (November 23, 2016) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook) (p None)
  2. U.S. v. Hill, No. 3:16-cr-00009-jag (E.D.Va.) (182 F.Supp.3d 547) (April 22, 2016) (Judge John A. Jr. Gibney) (p None)
  3. U.S. v. Williams, No. 15-10475 (9th Cir.) (842 F.3d 1143) (December 5, 2016) (Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz) (p None)
  4. Watson v. U.S., No. 14-CV-6459 (E.D.N.Y.) (179 F.Supp.3d 251) (February 25, 2016) (Judge Jack B. Weinstein) (p None)
  5. Estate of Miller v. Marberry, No. 15-1497 (7th Cir.) ( F.3d ) (January 30, 2017) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook) (p None)

U.S. v. Patrick, No. 15-2443 (7th Cir.) (842 F.3d 540) (November 23, 2016) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook)

U.S. v. Hill, No. 3:16-cr-00009-jag (E.D.Va.) (182 F.Supp.3d 547) (April 22, 2016) (Judge John A. Jr. Gibney)

U.S. v. Williams, No. 15-10475 (9th Cir.) (842 F.3d 1143) (December 5, 2016) (Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz)

CASE SUMMARY


OVERVIEW: HOLDINGS: [1]-Questions about appellant's gang affiliation were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response, even if the federal RICO charges had not yet been filed, because when the deputy asked appellant about his gang membership, he had already been arrested on charges of murder, conspiracy to commit …

Watson v. U.S., No. 14-CV-6459 (E.D.N.Y.) (179 F.Supp.3d 251) (February 25, 2016) (Judge Jack B. Weinstein)

CASE SUMMARY


OVERVIEW: HOLDINGS: [1]-After a bench trial under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the government was found liable to plaintiff for falsely arresting him, and for falsely imprisoning him for 27 days as he was a United States citizen at the time of his arrest and initial detention by …

Estate of Miller v. Marberry, No. 15-1497 (7th Cir.) ( F.3d ) (January 30, 2017) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook)

CASE SUMMARY


OVERVIEW: HOLDINGS: [1]-Where a prisoner fell out of an upper bunk and broke his back, a guard and the warden were properly granted summary judgment as to the prisoner's Bivens action under the Eighth Amendment because neither the guard nor the warden was responsible for bunk assignments, the …