DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.
141435P.pdf   07/27/2015  Mark Robbins  v.  Randy Becker, Sr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1435
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Loken and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil rights. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, 
   see Robbins v. Becker, 715 F.3d 691 (8th Cir. 2013). In action alleging 
   the defendant state troopers and towing companies conspired to interfere 
   with plaintiffs' towing business, the district court did not err in 
   finding plaintiffs did not have a legitimate claim of entitlement to any 
   particular towing work and could not establish a 
   constitutionally-protected property right; nor did their claims establish 
   violation of a liberty interest; in order to establish a "class-of-one" 
   equal protection claim, a plaintiff must provide a specific and detailed 
   account of the nature of the preferred treatment of the favored class, 
   especially where the state actors exercise broad discretion to balance a 
   number of legitimate considerations, and plaintiffs failed to meet this 
   exacting standard; absent a constitutional violation, plaintiffs could not 
   state an actionable conspiracy claim; with respect to the claim that the 
   officers conspired with other towing companies to restrain and monopolize 
   trade in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the plaintiffs 
   failed to produce any evidence of such a conspiracy. Judge Loken, 
   concurring. 
  
142576P.pdf   07/27/2015  United States  v.  Randy Patrie
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2576
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Waterloo    
   [PUBLISHED] [Shepherd, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Loken, Circuit 
   Judge] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Where the district court found by a 
   preponderance of the evidence at the sentencing hearing that during a 
   burglary defendant had murdered the home owner with the shotgun seized 
   from defendant's home, the district court did not err in applying a cross 
   reference for murder to defendant's felon in possession charge; the 
   district court did not err in determining defendant's Iowa second-degree 
   burglary convictions were violent felonies for purposes of sentencing 
   under the Armed Career Criminal Act; under this Circuit's precedents, the 
   district court did not violate defendant's Sixth Amendment rights when it 
   determined that he was a career offender. 
  
142874U.pdf   07/27/2015  United States  v.  Markeace Canty
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2874
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Riley, Chief Judge, and Bright and 
   Melloy, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Any error in admitting 
   evidence seized from defendant's phone and wallet was harmless in light of 
   the other evidence of his guilt; further, the record showed the evidence 
   on the phone was admissible under the inevitable discovery rule since it 
   was synched to a laptop which was lawfully seized under the search 
   warrant; 300-month sentence was not substantively unreasonable. 
  
143161U.pdf   07/27/2015  Augustine Onuoha  v.  International Univ. of Nursing
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3161
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bye and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Civil Procedure. Defendant did not waive its right to move to 
   dismiss for failure to state a claim by failing to object to the 
   magistrate judge's order permitting the filing of an amended complaint; no 
   error in denying plaintiff's motion to file a second amended complaint. 
  
143567P.pdf   07/27/2015  United States  v.  Howard Fleetwood
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3567
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines    
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Murphy and Melloy, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Even if the court assumes that the district 
   court erred in failing to address defendant personally and offer him an 
   opportunity to make a statement before imposing a revocation sentence and 
   that such a requirement was clear under current law, defendant was still 
   not entitled to any relief under a plain error analysis as he could not 
   show the error affected his substantial rights or seriously affected the 
   fairness, integrity or reputation of the proceedings. Judge Murphy, 
   concurring. 
  
143689U.pdf   07/27/2015  United States  v.  Randy Bise
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3689
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Murphy and Gruender, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The district court did not err in 
   applying enhancements under Guidelines Sec. 3D1.2, 3D1.4 (grouping of 
   offenses) and Guidelines Sec. 4B1.5(b) (pattern of offenses involving 
   prohibited sexual conduct with a minor) and the enhancements did not 
   amount to impermissible double counting; below-Guidelines sentence was not 
   substantively unreasonable. 
  
151439U.pdf   07/27/2015  Anthony Rizzuti  v.  Linda Sanders
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1439
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Bye and Kelly, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil case - Bivens. Defendants' summary judgment affirmed without 
   comment.