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.
153538P.pdf   02/22/2017  Brian Knowlton  v.  Anheuser-Busch Companies
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3538
                          and No:  15-3851
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Murphy and Smith, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - ERISA. In action by former Sea World employees claiming they 
   were entitled to enhanced pension benefits under the defendant's salaried 
   employee pension plan, the district court correctly determined that 
   Section 19.11(f) of the plan entitled plaintiffs to enhanced pension 
   benefit; this decision is in accord with the Sixth Circuit's 
   interpretation of the provision in Adams v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., 758 F.3d 
   743 (6th Cir. 2014); with respect to plaintiff's cross-appeal, asserting 
   the district court erred by failing to make individual calculations of the 
   enhanced benefits owed to individual members of the class, the district 
   court erred in concluding that plaintiff's complaint sought only a 
   declaration that Section 19.11(f) applied, as their complaint made a 
   sufficient request for an actual award of certain benefits with the 
   application of the enhanced benefit; therefore, the matter of the 
   calculation of benefits is reversed and remanded with instructions to 
   reconsider the plaintiff's prayer for relief and, to the extent requested 
   and provable, calculate and award the benefits owed to plaintiffs by 
   applying Section 19.11(f); finally, on remand, the district court should 
   reconsider whether certain records concerning the absentee class members 
   will assist in its calculation of the requested benefits. 
  
153649P.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Michael Huyck
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3649
                          and No:  15-3652
   U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Beam, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. There was probable cause, based on 
   information showing defendant had accessed "Pedoboard," a secret or hidden 
   bulletin board trafficking in child pornography, to support the issuance 
   of a warrant for his home and computers; no error in admitting evidence 
   that defendant used a program called "downthemall" to efficiently download 
   content from websites when he was charged with accessing and receiving 
   child pornography; no error in admitting evidence concerning the Onion 
   Pedo Video Archive as it was relevant to defendant's knowledge of the Tor 
   network used to access Pedoboard and his intent to view child pornography; 
   the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's convictions for 
   receipt, viewing and possessing child pornography; inconsistent responses 
   on the verdict forms did not require the granting of a new trial as the 
   evidence was sufficient on the counts on which defendant was convicted. 
  
153954P.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Larry Mikawa
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3954
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City    
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Wollman, Circuit 
   Judge] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Where the defendant had been found not 
   guilty by reason of insanity and had been civilly committed for care and 
   treatment under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 4243, the district court did not err in 
   denying his request for conditional release based on its finding he 
   continued to present a substantial risk of danger to other persons or 
   property. 
  
161416P.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Bruce Swisshelm
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1416
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield    
   [PUBLISHED] [Wollman, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Kelly, Circuit 
   Judge] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing (Government Appeal). Defendant concedes that he 
   violated the plea agreement by asking for a below-guidelines sentence; the 
   breach affected the district court's decision and the matter is remanded 
   for resentencing before a different judge. 
  
161423U.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Fredrick Graham
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1423
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Smith and Benton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. In a felon-in-possession prosecution, the 
   district court did not err in admitting evidence of defendant's 2009 
   firearms-related arrest as it was relevant to show knowledge and intent; 
   further, the evidence was not unfairly prejudicial and the court twice 
   instructed the jury on the limited purpose of such evidence; no error in 
   rejecting defendant's proposed instruction on implicit racial bias. 
  
161884P.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Charles Bacon
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1884
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield    
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Riley, Chief Judge, and Smith and Benton, 
   Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court carefully considered the 
   relevant Guidelines factors, including public protection, the need to 
   promote respect for the law, as well as defendant's continuing disrespect 
   for the law, and it did not abuse its discretion by varying upward. 
  
161970P.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Steven Petersen
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1970
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids    
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Loken and Benton, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. The evidence was sufficient 
   to show defendant violated the terms of his supervision by committing the 
   new offense of soliciting an aggravated misdemeanor; sentence imposed was 
   not substantively unreasonable. 
  
163194U.pdf   02/22/2017  United States  v.  Jeffery Gbor
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-3194
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Bowman and Benton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The restitution order in the 
   matter was not plainly erroneous; the court would not consider claims of 
   ineffective assistance of counsel in this direct appeal.