for the Eighth Circuit

153558P.pdf   04/26/2017  Mark Moore  v.  Mark Martin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3558
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock   
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Benton, Circuit 
   Judge] 
   Civil case - Arkansas Election Law. The district court did not err in 
   determining that the March 1 filing deadline for independent candidates 
   posed a burden "of some substance" on plaintiff's First and Fourteenth 
   Amendments and that the state has a compelling interest in timely 
   certifying independent candidates for inclusion on the general ballot; 
   however the court erred in concluding there was no genuine dispute of 
   material fact whether the March 1 deadline is narrowly drawn to serve that 
   compelling interest; on this record, there exists a genuine factual 
   dispute whether the verification of independent candidate would conflict 
   with the processing of other signature petitions if the former May 1 
   deadline were used; remanded for further proceedings. Chief Judge Smith, 
   dissenting. 
  
162752P.pdf   04/26/2017  United States  v.  Jermaine Ford
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-2752
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport   
   [PUBLISHED] [Rossiter, Author, with Wollman and Loken, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Sentence imposed upon the revocation of 
   defendant's supervised release affirmed as it is substantively reasonable 
   and reflected the district court's weighing of the 3553(a) factors, 
   including the circumstances of the violation and defendant's risk to the 
   community. 
  
163053P.pdf   04/26/2017  United States  v.  Timothy Anderson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-3053
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not err in denying 
   defendant's motion to dismiss his indictment on the ground that his 
   prosecution for distributing heroin violated his rights under the 
   Religious Freedom Restoration Act; defendant is being prosecuted for 
   distributing heroin to others for non-religious use; the prosecution of 
   defendant under the Controlled Substances Act furthers the compelling 
   government interest in mitigating the risk that heroin will be diverted to 
   recreational users; the government has chosen the least restrictive means 
   necessary to further that interest; the district court did not err in 
   refusing to permit defendant to present this defense to the jury. 
  
163774U.pdf   04/26/2017  United States  v.  Hector Vega-Martinez
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-3774
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque   
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Riley, Murphy and Shepherd, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. No error in imposing an alcohol 
   ban as part of the special conditions of defendant's supervised release.