The SDFLA Blog is dedicated to providing news and notes regarding federal practice in the Southern District of Florida. The New Times calls the blog "the definitive source on South Florida's federal court system." All tips on court happenings are welcome and will remain anonymous. Please email David Markus at dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Showing posts with label 11th Circuit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 11th Circuit. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Whoops
Today the Eleventh Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, affirmed a sentence meted out by Judge Donald Graham in United States v. Aguirre-Lopez. One of the issues raised by Aguirre-Lopez was that the 11th Circuit should wait until the Supreme Court decided Rita before issuing an opinion. The 11th Circuit said that wasn't necessary -- it need not wait on the High Court to issue an opinion in Rita because it wouldn't affect the outcome. Fair enough..... except one thing: the Supreme Court decided Rita last Thursday and Aguirre Lopez came out today. WHOOPS!
Saturday, June 09, 2007
11th Circuit quote
A tipster emails me:
Oral argument in the 11th Circuit on Thursday in a sexual harassment case where the defense was, apparently, that the sexual gestures/advances were welcomed by the receiver.
Judge Wilson made the point that, even if there was no sexual harassment at the outset, it at least became a jury question by the end, when defendant allegedly had opened his pants to the plaintiff in the workplace and exposed his genitalia to her, to which defendant's counsel replied, as best I recall:"I cannot leave the inflammatory comments from Judge Wilson hanging out there." Not the best choice of metaphor . . .
Oral argument in the 11th Circuit on Thursday in a sexual harassment case where the defense was, apparently, that the sexual gestures/advances were welcomed by the receiver.
Judge Wilson made the point that, even if there was no sexual harassment at the outset, it at least became a jury question by the end, when defendant allegedly had opened his pants to the plaintiff in the workplace and exposed his genitalia to her, to which defendant's counsel replied, as best I recall:"I cannot leave the inflammatory comments from Judge Wilson hanging out there." Not the best choice of metaphor . . .
Monday, March 26, 2007
Cert granted
The United States Supreme Court has taken a case from the Southern District of Florida, U.S. v. Williams, a case about the constitutionality of a child pornography law:
The [11th Circuit] court panel found the pandering provision of the PROTECT Act of 2003 was overbroad and impermissibly vague, saying that it criminalizes the speech of someone who touts material as child pornography when in fact it is clean or nonexistent.In the appeals court's view, the pandering provision could apply to an e-mail entitled "Good pics of kids in bed" sent by a grandparent, with innocent pictures attached of grandchildren in pajamas. One sender might be a proud grandparent while another might be a convicted child molester who hopes to trade for more graphic photos with like-minded recipients, the appeals court said. In asking the court to take the case, the Bush administration said the appeals court read the law's language more broadly than is warranted.
Judge Middlebrooks initially found the law was constitutional. Judges Barkett, Wilson and Reavley were the 11th Circuit panel that reversed (in an opinion by Judge Reavley,who was visiting from the Fifth Circuit), finding the Protect Act vague and overbroad. Rick Diaz and Lou Guerra represented Mr. Williams, who is now headed to Washington...
The [11th Circuit] court panel found the pandering provision of the PROTECT Act of 2003 was overbroad and impermissibly vague, saying that it criminalizes the speech of someone who touts material as child pornography when in fact it is clean or nonexistent.In the appeals court's view, the pandering provision could apply to an e-mail entitled "Good pics of kids in bed" sent by a grandparent, with innocent pictures attached of grandchildren in pajamas. One sender might be a proud grandparent while another might be a convicted child molester who hopes to trade for more graphic photos with like-minded recipients, the appeals court said. In asking the court to take the case, the Bush administration said the appeals court read the law's language more broadly than is warranted.
Judge Middlebrooks initially found the law was constitutional. Judges Barkett, Wilson and Reavley were the 11th Circuit panel that reversed (in an opinion by Judge Reavley,who was visiting from the Fifth Circuit), finding the Protect Act vague and overbroad. Rick Diaz and Lou Guerra represented Mr. Williams, who is now headed to Washington...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)