OPINIONS ARE POSTED DAILY BETWEEN 10:00 and 11:00 a.m. Today is: [ Sunday May 01, 2016 ] - - - - - NO OPINIONS HAVE BEEN POSTED TODAY The most recent opinions are for: [ 04/29/2016 ]  
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[UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing.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.