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.
143141P.pdf   05/19/2016  United States  v.  Torrance Cotton
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3141
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal Case - conviction. Conviction for conspiracy to distribute 
   cocaine and possession with intent to distribute cocaine is affirmed. 
   Although the district court and the government recited some of the 
   purposes for which evidence of prior conviction may be used without an 
   accompanying case-specific analysis, any error in admitting the evidence 
   of prior convictions was harmless. District court did not err in admitting 
   co-conspirator's post arrest statement to rehabilitate another 
   co-conspirator's statement, as it was offered for impeachment purposes, 
   was non-hearsay co-conspirator statements, and was admitted solely under 
   Rule 806. Prior consistent statements are not admissible as rehabilitative 
   evidence, but may be admitted to explain or impeach inconsistent 
   statement. In this case the district court did not abuse its discretion in 
   admitting all the proffered evidence. District court did not err in 
   concluding the government's suppression of the photograph used for 
   identification purposes did not constitute a Brady violation, as there was 
   no reasonable probability the result would have been different had the 
   earlier photograph been disclosed to defendant; district court did not 
   abuse its discretion in denying a new trial. Judge Colloton concurs in 
   part and concurs in the judgment. 
  
151064U.pdf   05/19/2016  United States  v.  Kelvin Stanford
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1064
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam. Before Murphy, Beam, and Gruender, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal Case - revocation of supervised release. Imposition of 18-month 
   sentence, an upward variance from the advisory guidelines, for committing 
   an almost identical crime three months after release from imprisonment was 
   not an abuse of discretion and the sentence was not unreasonable. 
   Determining the sentence would run consecutively to any sentence imposed 
   as a result of the new charges was not an abuse of discretion. 
  
151815P.pdf   05/19/2016  Brook Mallak  v.  Anthony Runde
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-1815
                          and No:  15-1819
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Gruender, Author, with Murphy and Beam, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil Case - Driver's Privacy Protection Act. This interlocutory appeal 
   from the denial of qualified immunity by police officers who accessed 
   personal data maintained by the Minnesota Department of Vehicle Services 
   is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, as this court lacks jurisdiction to 
   reevaluate on interlocutory appeal the district court's determination that 
   the question sets forth a genuine issue of fact for trial. The record does 
   not foreclose the possibility that the officer accessed the data for a 
   purpose not permitted by the Act. 
  
152317P.pdf   05/19/2016  A. H.  v.  Midwest Bus Sales, Inc
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-2317
                          and No:  15-2318
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City    
   [PUBLISHED] [Chief Judge Riley, Author, with Loken and Benton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Civil Case - diversity. Following a state court trial on strict liability 
   and negligence claims which resulted in verdict in favor of defendants, 
   parallel diversity action in federal court against the retail seller of 
   the bus (who was not named in the amended complaint in the state court 
   action) for negligence was dismissed on grounds of res judicata because 
   Midwest Bus was in privity with the state court defendants. In this 
   appeal, collateral estoppel, not res judicata, precludes the relitigation 
   in federal court on the improper installation issue, as the state court 
   jury unambiguously decided the injuries were not caused by improper 
   installation of automatic slack adjusters on the bus, and the failure to 
   warn claim could not be relitigated because the jury had to have concluded 
   that the automatic slack adjusters were not the cause or contributing 
   clause of the crash. 
  
153316U.pdf   05/19/2016  Michael Westfall  v.  Carolyn Colvin
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3316
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam. Before Loken, Bye, and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil Case - social security. The decision to deny disability insurance 
   and supplemental security income benefits is supported by substantial 
   evidence on the record as a whole. Westfall did not meet his burden of 
   showing his mood disorder was a severe impairment and the ALJ was not 
   required to develop the record on the mood disorder. The ALJ's residual 
   functional capacity determinations and the credibility findings were 
   consistent with the record. 
  
153968U.pdf   05/19/2016  United States  v.  Kevin Shook
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3968
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Sioux City    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam. Before Murphy, Bowman, and Benton, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal Case - Sentence Reduction. District court did not abuse its 
   discretion in declining to reduce sentence in light of defendant?s 
   criminal history and the circumstances of the offense.