U.S. Seventh Circuit - The FindLaw 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

Recent Criminal Law Decisions

The former Subway pitchman turned social pariah, Jared Fogle, has filed a motion requesting Judge Tanya Pratt recuse herself from his case. The longshot motion is not only not likely to go anywhere, it has no bearing on his conviction or length of his sentence, as those appeals have already been taken and squashed.

In short, Fogle incredulously claims that Judge Pratt is biased against him because she has teenage daughters and Fogle's case involves convictions for child pornography with teen girls and for sex with teens as well. But at this point, Judge Pratt likely has little jurisdiction over Fogle's case and incarceration.

Teens Win Coerced Confession Case

Judge Diane Wood must be over it with coercive police interrogations.

Writing for the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, she reviewed a complaint by teenagers who allegedly confessed to murdering their uncle. Calling out the cops facing civil liability in the case, Wood sets off every so-called "confession" in parentheses.

"Even though William and Deadra 'confessed,' if a trier of fact could conclude that the officers knew that the confessions were false, then the officers are not entitled to qualified immunity for their actions," the court said in Hurt v. Wise.

Court: Brendan Dassey's 'Making a Murderer' Confession Was Voluntary

If the U.S.Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals were a trial court, Brendan Dassey would be a free man now.

The appeals court split over the case, voting 4-3 that Dassey's murder confession was voluntary. The dissent said the 16-year-old's confession came through a "perfect storm" of interrogations.

"No reasonable state court, knowing what we now know about coercive interrogation techniques and viewing Dassey's interrogation in light of his age, intellectual deficits, and manipulability, could possibly have concluded that Dassey's confession was voluntarily given," Judge Illena Rovner wrote in Dassey v. Dittmann.

Remember Jared? He was just that everyday overweight American who lost more than half his body weight by eating a submarine sandwich every day. How could you forget someone that epitomized the American dream so well?

He was one of the spokesmen that people were actually inspired by. Which was what made his recent conviction for child pornography all the more shocking. Many people pictured him as a wholesome individual, who, with hard work and eating a submarine sandwich a day, got skinny, then became famous.

Unfortunately for some people that bought into the shtick, they got neither. And the Seventh Circuit, having already rejected Fogle, was likely not pleased when another motion landed on their bench, and were probably saddened that Judge Posner was no longer on the bench as a benchslapping may have been in order for the sandwich king of cellblock 2, now a pro se litigant presenting a sovereign citizen defense.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has denied the appeals of two animal rights activists charged under the Animal Enterprise Terrorist Act (AETA). The appeal challenged the act itself as unconstitutional, and also charged that the use of word terrorist denied the activists substantive due process rights.

After losing their motion to dismiss based on those issues, the appellants pleaded guilty to the charges on the condition that they be allowed to appeal the motion ruling. Unfortunately for them, their appeal was denied, leaving them unable to escape their sentencing, unlike the furry friends they helped.

Court to Rehear 'Making a Murderer' Case

Call it 'Making a Murderer -- the Sequel.'

That's because Brendan Dassey, a convicted murderer featured in the Netflix documentary, will get another chance at infamy or redemption. The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to rehear a decision that he involuntarily confessed to raping and killing Teresa Halbach at a salvage yard in 2005.

Dassey told investigators that he and his uncle Stephen Avery committed the crimes. In the documentary, filmmakers told the story about how Avery was wrongfully convicted and spent 18 years in prison.

City Traffic Ordinance Claims Dismissed

When a judge says 'hodge-podge' to describe your complaint, you might have a problem.

But if the writing on the wall was not clear enough for the plaintiffs who sued to dispatch their traffic tickets, then the federal appeals court spelled it out for them in the end. Cases, dismissed.

"Although people raise an astonishing variety of claims in the federal courts of this country, the fact remains that there are limits on the subject-matter jurisdiction of those courts," Chief Judge Diane Wood wrote in Lennon v. City of Carmel, Indiana.

Indiana Burglary Includes Fenced Area, 7th Cir. Rules

Can justice be blind when there is an elephant in the room?

It hardly seems possible in a case from Indiana, where an appeals court affirmed a burglary conviction as a "violent felony." An Indiana burglary includes "outdoor, fenced in areas," the court said in United States of America v. Perry, resulting in a sentence enhancement.

Jason Perry complained because, coupled with firearms violations, he got 360 months for his crimes. The elephant in the room, however, was the man had just murdered his ex-girlfriend.

7th Cir. Overturns Conviction of Brendan Dassey From 'Making a Murderer'

Is it bigger news that another murder conviction was overturned, or that the alleged killer was featured in a television series?

In either case, there will be a second season to "Making a Murderer," the Netflix documentary that told the story of Steven Avery, who spent 18 years in prison for being wrongfully convicted of sexual assault and attempted murder.

That's because now there is a new story to tell. Brendan Dassey, who was convicted with Avery in a later murder, has been exonerated by a federal appeals court.

A U.S. district court in Chicago recently denied a warrant that would have allowed the government to compel any individual at the searched location to unlock his iPhone, iPad, or other Apple electronic device that was protected Touch ID. The warrant application raises serious Fourth and Fifth Amendment concerns, the court explained, and fails to establish sufficient probable cause for the request that "is neither limited to a particular person nor a particular device."

Last summer, the U.S. government obtained a similar warrant to compel anyone in a building in California to unlock their phones with their fingerprints, but the recent ruling out of Illinois shows how such requests can meet resistance.