CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT

DAVID EDDLEMAN,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
KEN MCKEE,
Respondent-Appellant.


No. 08-1093

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 04-70830—Arthur J. Tarnow, District Judge.
Argued: June 10, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 12, 2009
Before: BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; NORRIS and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.

_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. This case is before us for a second time. In its first iteration, we affirmed the district court’s order that the State retry David Eddleman because his confession to second-degree murder had been unconstitutionally admitted into evidence during the first trial. The district court thereafter ordered Eddleman released from prison and barred his reprosecution, on the ground that the State took too long to conduct the second trial. The State appeals that order, arguing the district court was without jurisdiction to enter it. We agree, and reverse.


CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GABRIEL SCHAFFER,
Defendant-Appellant.


No. 09-3053

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.
No. 08-00097-002—Patricia A. Gaughan, District Judge.
Argued: July 29, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 12, 2009
Before: BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judge; VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.

_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge. A grand jury charged Gabriel Schaffer with conspiracy to commit computer fraud and to transport stolen property interstate. Upon Schaffer’s motion, the district court dismissed the count charging interstate transportation of stolen property but denied that motion in all other respects. Schaffer then entered a conditional guilty plea, admitting that he conspired to commit computer fraud. On appeal, Schaffer contends that the indictment should be dismissed due to the omission of essential elements, violation of the statute of limitations, pre-indictment delay, and entrapment as a matter of law. Because the district court correctly rejected each of these arguments, we AFFIRM.


CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT

JEFF LOWERY, LISA LOWERY, RANDY GILES and MICHAEL KELLEY,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, DOUG MOODY and GREG SHARPE,
Defendants-Appellees.


No. 07-6324

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville.
No. 05-00570—Thomas W. Phillips, District Judge.
Argued: August 6, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 12, 2009
Before: KEITH, SUTTON and WHITE, Circuit Judges.

_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

SUTTON, Circuit Judge. Three parents and their lawyer filed this § 1983 action under the First and Fourteenth Amendments after being denied permission to make a repeat appearance before the Board of Education of Jefferson County, Tennessee. The district court refused to overturn a jury verdict in favor of the defendants and awarded attorney’s fees to the defendants. We affirm the jury’s verdict, but we reverse the court’s grant of attorney’s fees.