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.
153647P.pdf   12/02/2016  United States  v.  Charles James Jones
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  15-3647
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul    
   [PUBLISHED] [Murphy, Author, with Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. Standard for review for the 
   district court's decision to strictly limit defendant's fire 
   investigator's testimony to the opinions he provided in his final report 
   disclosure under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(b)(1)(C) is whether the decision was 
   an abuse of discretion; the district court did not abuse its discretion by 
   excluding the expert's proposed testimony about deficiencies in the 
   government expert's investigation and his cognitive bias as these matters 
   were not disclosed in the final report as required by the Rule; no error 
   in denying defendant's motion to suppress statements he made to police 
   officers while they were investigating an on-going fire, as the statements 
   were either admissible under the public safety exception to Miranda or 
   were not statements that would have a significant impact on the jury 
   verdict; the court could not say that defendant's statements were not 
   voluntary even though he had been intoxicated by a prescription drug; 
   officer's request for a clarification of a voluntarily-made statement was 
   not an interrogation; defendant's unprovoked and spontaneous statement at 
   the station house was admissible; no error in finding the drugged, 
   sleeping victim was a vulnerable victim for purposes of the application of 
   Guidelines Sec. 3A1.1(b)(1) 
161268P.pdf   12/02/2016  Eduardo Custodio  v.  Cecilia Marianela Torres Samil
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1268
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Wollman and Arnold, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child 
   Abduction. Because one of the children involved in this matter turned 16 
   during the pendency of the proceedings, the Hague Convention no longer 
   applies to him; where respondent asserted a "mature child" defense to the 
   petition, the district court's evaluation of 15-year-old child's testimony 
   regarding his desire to remain in the U.S. was entitled to deference; the 
   commentary to the Explanatory Report regarding the Conventions states that 
   a child's views on the matter can be conclusive on the issue of return; 
   the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying petitioner's 
   request to return the child to Peru where the child clearly stated his 
   desire to remain in the U.S. with respondent. 
161429U.pdf   12/02/2016  United States  v.  Jermaine Gadson
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-1429
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Riley, Chief Judge, and Smith and 
   Kelly, Circuit Judge] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. Even if the arresting officer was mistaken 
   in his belief that signaling was required prior to exiting a traffic 
   circle, the officer's error of law was reasonable, and the traffic stop 
   was permissible; evidence seized during the stop was admissible. 
162497U.pdf   12/02/2016  Charles LaLiberte  v.  Charles Samuels, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  16-2497
   U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Arnold and Kelly, Circuit 
   Civil case. Dismissal affirmed without comment.