U.S. Fourth Circuit: September 2010 Archives
U.S. Fourth Circuit - The FindLaw 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

September 2010 Archives

US v. Vann, 09-4298, concerned a challenge to the district court's imposition of an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) based on defendant's three previous convictions for taking indecent liberties with a child, in a prosecution for possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(g).  In affirming, the court held that the defendant's three prior convictions were based on his taking indecent liberties with a child by willfully committing a lewd or lascivious act upon the body of a child under the age of 16.  Further, as so formulated, defendant's convictions were for violent felonies that serve as predicate offenses under the ACCA.

 

US v. White, 09-7933

US v. White, 09-7933, concerned a challenge to the district court's grant of the prosecution's motion to forcibly medicate defendant, who suffers from Delusional Disorder, Grandiose Type, for the purpose of rendering defendant competent to stand trial, in a prosecution of defendant for conspiracy, credit card fraud and identity theft.  In reversing, the court held that the Supreme Court made clear in Sell that forced medication of an accused in an effort to restore competency for trial is constitutionally permissible in "limited circumstances," and here, the district court's order comes perilously close to a forcible medication regime best described not as "limited," but as "routine."

Related Resource:

Rice v Rivera, 08-8191

Rice v Rivera, 08-8191, concerned a challenge to the district court's denial of defendant's request for habeas relief from his conviction for using a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense, in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 924(c).

 

Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Ltd, P'Ship, 08-2381

Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Ltd, P'Ship, 08-2381, concerned a challenge to the district court's determination that defendants' depictions of a logo in season highlight films and in the Ravens corporate lobby were fair use, in entering judgment against the plaintiff, in plaintiff's copyright infringement suit against the Baltimore Ravens football organization and National Football League entities for their unauthorized copying of a Ravens team logo, drawn by plaintiff, that was used for three seasons as the team's official symbol.