as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.
111500P.pdf 12/06/2012 United States v. Randeep Mann U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 11-1500 and No: 11-2187 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Smith and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and Sentencing. When a grand jury is not in session during the thirty-day period set forth in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3161(b), the period for filing an indictment is automatically extended, and the district court did not err in denying defendant's Speedy Trial Act motion; 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(o) is a lesser included offense of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 5861(d), and defendant Mann's convictions on counts charging violations of both sections must be remanded with instructions to vacate one of the convictions; indictment gave adequate notice of the accusations and a bill of particulars filed in response to defendant's request did not amend the indictment; while three counts charging firearm violations were improperly joined with bombing and obstruction of justice counts, the joinder did not prejudice defendant; no error in denying defendant's motion to sever his case from his wife's prosecution as they were both charged with conspiracy and the evidence against his wife could have been admitted against defendant even if she had not been joined; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting use of weapon of mass destruction; the vehicle belonging to the victim in the bombing was used in commerce as that phrase is used in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 844(i) and the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for possessing unregistered grenades; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for obstruction of justice, and the instructions on these counts were proper; claims of constructive amendment of the indictment or fatal variance rejected; district court did not err in applying the cross-reference for attempted murder contained in Guidelines Sec. 3A1.2; no error in finding the victim was an "official victim" as defined by Guidelines Sec. 3A1.2; no error in imposing an enhancement for obstruction of justice under Guidelines Sec. 3C1.1 where defendant directed the assault of a federal inmate; the court did err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines Sec. 2K2.1(b)(4) for possessing grenades with an altered serial number as the grenades were not manufactured with serial numbers; court erred in imposing an enhancement for possession of stolen firearms under Guidelines Sec. 2k2.1(b)(4), as there was no evidence that the grenades in question had been stolen. Judge Smith, concurring in part and dissenting in part. 121621U.pdf 12/06/2012 United States v. Quentin Jetton U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 12-1621 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Sioux City [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Sentencing. Sentence imposed upon revocation of defendant's supervised release was not an abuse of the district court's discretion and was not unreasonable. 121638P.pdf 12/06/2012 Curtis L. Nelson v. American Home Assurance Co. U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 12-1638 U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Colloton, Circuit Judge]
Civil case - Insurance. Plaintiffs failed to show that their property damage was caused by accident arising out of the insured's operations; while a Miller-Shugart judgment establishes the insured's liability it does not establish that the insured's policy provides coverage.