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.
152018U.pdf   04/29/2016  United States  v.  Javon Dockery
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-2018
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Shepherd, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Sentence was imposed after a full discussion 
   of all of the 3553(a) factors, and the district court did not err in 
   imposing an upward variance after determining that a sentence within the 
   advisory guidelines range would not adequately reflect the seriousness of 
   defendant's conduct, promote respect for the law, serve as a deterrent or 
   protect the public. 
  
152096P.pdf   04/29/2016  National Surety Corporation  v.  Dustex Corporation
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-2096
                          and No:  15-2328
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, Waterloo    
   [PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Insurance. Under either Georgia or Iowa law the district 
   court did not clearly err in finding that Dustex knew or should have known 
   that Fireman's Fund was proceeding under a reservation of rights, and the 
   insurer was not estoped from denying coverage based on an argument that it 
   had failed to give Dustex effective notice that it was defending the 
   arbitration action under a reservation of rights. 
  
152320P.pdf   04/29/2016  United States  v.  David Makeeff
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-2320
   U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Des Moines    
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Murphy, Smith and Benton, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Under the facts presented, defendant's 
   probation officers reasonably suspected defendant was violating the 
   provisions of his supervision by viewing pornography and they had both the 
   requisite reasonable suspicion and the search condition necessary to 
   lawfully seize a USB drive found in plain sight in defendant's residence; 
   under the facts presented, including defendant's post-seizure and 
   pre-inspection admission that the drive contained child pornography, the 
   probation officers had the requisite reasonable suspicion and search 
   condition necessary to lawfully search the drive for child pornography. 
  
153193P.pdf   04/29/2016  United States  v.  John Hill
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3193
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville    
   [PUBLISHED] [Arnold, Author, with Wollman and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Defendant's constitutional challenges to his 
   SORNA prosecution are foreclosed by Eighth Circuit precedents; in 
   determining whether defendant's prior offense was conduct that by its 
   nature was a sex offense against a minor under SORNA, the court joins the 
   circuits which have adopted a "circumstance-specific approach;" here, the 
   circumstances that underlie defendant's prior conviction for indecent 
   exposure clearly show it was an offense involving a minor victim and, for 
   SORNA purposes, he committed a sex offense against a minor and was 
   obligated to register and update his information under SORNA.