#SOCIALMEDIA Fight leads to #MURDER !!!

Wausau, Wis. (AP) — A 13-year-old boy has died after he was stabbed during a fight in Wausau that may have been prompted by a dispute on social media.

Wausau police say the stabbing happened Friday after several Wausau high school and middle school students who claim to be gang members had been arguing on Facebook during the day. The Facebook messages indicated that several of the students planned on fighting.

At about 5:30 p.m., six or seven juveniles drove to a house on the 900 block of Jefferson Street. One person fired a BB gun at juveniles who were on the porch.

Both groups began fighting in the street and the teen was stabbed twice in the back. A friend drove him to a hospital, where he died.

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Summaries for February 14, 2014

Herzog v. Graphic Packaging Int'l, Inc. Docket: 13-1717 Opinion Date: February 13, 2014 Judge: Williams Areas of Law: ERISA, Insurance Law Richard worked for GPI for 25 years until his 2009 death. He had a basic life insurance policy through GPI’s health and welfare plan and paid for an optional supplemental life insurance policy through GPI for several years. His wife, Maureen, was the beneficiary of both policies. At the end of 2008, Richard’s supplemental life insurance policy was cancelled. Richard’s pay stubs reflected the change, beginning in January 2009. When Richard died a few months later, GPI’s insurer, ABC, paid benefits on the basic life insurance policy. Richard had been diagnosed with stage 4 cancer in September 2008. Soon after Richard’s death, Maureen’s attorney requested information regarding Richard’s supplemental life insurance policy. The company refused the request, citing its confidentiality policy, indicating that the information would only be produced in response to a subpoena. Almost two years later, Maureen filed suit, claiming that either GPI or ABC breached the policy by terminating it without Richard’s consent, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. 1001. The district court awarded the defendants summary judgment. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. There was no material issue of fact as to whether Richard cancelled his supplemental policy. Although Maureen speculated that someone other than Richard terminated the policy, she presented no evidence to support her assertion. http://j.st/Zkqk View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Boyce Docket: 13-1087 Opinion Date: February 13, 2014 Judge: Williams Areas of Law: Criminal Law Portis called 911 because Boyce was “going crazy” and had a gun. The operator said, “He has a gun?” Portis responded, “I think so.” The operator said, “Come on,” Portis said, “Yes!” twice. To “Did you see one?” Portis replied, “Yes!” The operator cautioned about perjury. Portis responded, “I’m positive.” After describing Boyce, Portis stated that she didn’t know whether Boyce had left. Officers responded. After determining Boyce was not in the apartment, they interviewed Portis and went to their car to complete a report. They saw Boyce return and call Portis’s name. Boyce ran from the officers. Officer Cummings chased him and saw Boyce reach toward his midsection, retrieve a handgun, and toss it into a yard. After catching Boyce, officers found a handgun in the area where Boyce threw a gun and found matching bullets in Boyce’s pocket. Charged as a felon in possession of a firearm and of ammunition, 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1), Boyce sent a letter requesting that Portis recant her statement, providing the story he wanted her to use. They also spoke about “our story” by phone while he was in jail. Portis did not testify; the government played a recording of her 911 call. After his conviction, the district court concluded that Boyce had three prior violent felonies or serious drug offenses that mandated a minimum term of 15 years’ imprisonment under the ACCA, 18 U.S.C. 924(e)(1), and sentenced him to 210 months. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that Boyce’s civil rights had been restored. The court upheld admission of the 911 call under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule because they were made while under the stress of a domestic battery and related to it. http://j.st/ZkTt View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Florida bill would set hard prison time for welfare fraudsters

Florida welfare fraudsters beware. A bipartisan legislative effort designed to clobber public assistance abuse may soon send welfare perps to prison for a long time. 

Ripping off Medicaid, food stamps or taxpayer-funded cash assistance programs for more than $100,000 could mean 30 years in prison, the sentencing equivalent of seriously hurting a law officer. 

Wrongfully receiving or seeking public assistance in the amount of $20,000 could carry a penalty of up to 15 years in prison. 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/10/florida-bill-would-set-hard-prison-time-for-welfare-fraudsters/

Operation Outlaws - DEA 10 Most Wanted

Next PhotoPrevious Photo1 of 11

1 of 11:

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/gallery?section=news/iteam&id=9376455&photo=1

TAGS:

iteam

Operation Outlaws: Chicago DEA Most Wanted

Daily Opinion Summaries U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals - Criminal law

United States v. Jones Docket: 11-3864 Opinion Date: January 9, 2014 Judge: Rovner Areas of Law: Criminal Law Jones acknowledged participating in the armed robbery of the Guaranty Bank in Milwaukee as a getaway driver, but the government agreed to drop that charge and the charge in a second bank robbery, and to prosecute him only on a third bank robbery charge in exchange for testimony against Brown for the Guaranty Bank robbery. Brown was convicted of armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. 2 & 2113(a) and (d), and brandishing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. 2 and 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). Brown appealed, arguing that the court allowed the government to introduce expert testimony as lay testimony, that the jury instructions reduced the prosecution’s burden of proof, and that improper closing argument statements by the prosecution denied him a fair trial. Jones, who pled guilty to reduced charges, appealed only his sentence. The Seventh Circuit consolidated the appeals and affirmed. http://j.st/tbe View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Korber v. Bundesrepublik Deutscheland Docket: 12-3269 Opinion Date: January 9, 2014 Judge: Easterbrook Areas of Law: Government & Administrative Law, International Law After the end of World War II, holders of public and private bonds issued in Germany demanded repayment. Germany had suspended payment on many bonds during the 1930s, but some were not due until the 1950s or 1960s. A Debt Agreement involving 21 creditor nations specified that Germany would pay valid debts outstanding in 1945. Germany enacted a Validation Law requiring holders to submit foreign debt instruments for determination of whether the claims were genuine. In 1953 the U.S. and West Germany agreed by treaty (applicable to Germany as reconstituted in 1990) that the debts would be paid only if found to be legitimate. Holders had five years to submit documents for validation by a New York panel. Later claims went to an Examining Agency in Germany. Decisions were subject to review in Germany. Plaintiffs sued in 2008 under international diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(2), to recover on bearer bonds issued or guaranteed by Germany before the war. One holder never submitted to validation. The other submitted bonds to a panel in Germany, which found them ineligible, and did not seek review. The district court dismissed, holding that the Treaty is binding and that the suit was barred by a 10-year (Illinois) statute of limitations. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that the Treaty amounted to a taking without just compensation. The Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. 1491(a)(1), authorizes whatever compensation the Constitution requires and the Supreme Court has stated that there is no constitutional obstacle to an international property settlement. The Treaty is not self-executing; the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. 1350, cannot be used to contest the acts of foreign nations within their own borders. How Germany administers the validation process is for German courts to consider. The case was also barred by the limitations period. http://j.st/tbm View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Chavarria v. United States Docket: 11-3549 Opinion Date: January 9, 2014 Judge: Cudahy Areas of Law: Criminal Law, Immigration Law Chavarria, born in Mexico, became a legal permanent U.S. resident in 1982. In 2009, Chavarria pleaded guilty to distributing cocaine. One year later, the Supreme Court decided Padilla v. Kentucky, imposing a duty on defense attorneys to inform noncitizen clients of deportation risks stemming from plea agreements, and held that legal advice, or the lack thereof, involving the prospect of deportation resulting from guilty pleas can support a Sixth Amendment claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Chavarria filed a pro se motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255, claiming that his trial counsel stated that “the attorney had checked with the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement … and they said they were not interested” in deporting him. Chavarria was deported before counsel was appointed. The district court denied a motion to dismiss, holding that Padilla could be applied retroactively. Shortly thereafter, the Seventh Circuit decided, in Chaidez v. U.S., that Padilla was a new rule and not retroactive. The district court vacated its ruling and dismissed. While appeal was pending, the Supreme Court affirmed Chaidez, foreclosing Chavarria’s argument that Padilla was retroactive. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that Chaidez distinguished between providing no advice (actionable under Padilla) and providing bad advice (actionable under pre‐Padilla law). http://j.st/tbc View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Sullivan v. Running Waters Irrigation, Inc. Docket: 13-1308 Opinion Date: January 9, 2014 Judge: Cuday Areas of Law: Business Law, ERISA, Labor & Employment Law Alpine was an irrigation business owned by Robert from 1961 until it closed in 2009. Alpine was in arrears on pension fund payments to the Union. After a Joint Arbitration Board awarded it $56,269.97, the Union sought to compel the award under the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. 185, and the Employee Retirement Security Act, 29 U.S.C. 1132(e)(1). During a deposition, Robert’s son, Jeffery, admitted his sole ownership of RWI and JV, which were established upon Alpine’s closing. Like Alpine, RWI services and installs lawn irrigation systems. JV’s sole business is leasing to RWI equipment that it purchased from Alpine. RWI operates out of Jeffery’s home, Alpine’s prior business address; all but one of RWI’s employees worked for Alpine. Almost all of RWI’s customers are former Alpine customers. The magistrate first denied the Union’s motion to impose judgment against RWI and JV as successors, but determined that the companies were successors under ERISA and that FRCP 25(c) provided an appropriate procedure and granted a motion to substitute. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding that the court properly applied the multifactor ERISA successorship test to find that an “interest” had been transferred within the meaning of FRCP 25(c) and properly resolved the motion without an evidentiary hearing. http://j.st/tbU View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

7th Circuit Court of Appeals - #criminal, #health, #immigration Law

Netherlands Ins.. Co. v. Phusion Projects, Inc. Docket: 12-1355 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Contracts, Injury Law, Insurance Law Phusion manufactures and distributes an alcoholic beverage called “Four Loko.” Its original formula contained energy stimulants, such as caffeine, guarana, taurine, and wormwood. Phusion purchased a commercial general liability insurance policy and a umbrella policy from members of the Liberty Mutual Group. The policies include identical provisions, excluding coverage for bodily injury or property damage when the insured may be held liable by reason of causing or contributing to intoxication. Plaintiffs sued Phusion in separate state court actions, alleging injuries caused by consumption of Four Loko. Two cases involved traffic accidents, one involved a shooting, another involved paranoid behavior resulting in accidental death, and a fifth claim involved a death from heart trouble. Phusion notified Liberty, which sought a declaratory judgment regarding the scope of coverage. The district court examined the underlying cases in the context of comparable automobile exclusions and ruled that four of the five cases fell within the Liquor Liability Exclusion. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The Liquor Liability Exclusions in the policies are unambiguous and apply to Phusion. The allegations of simple negligence raised by the plaintiffs in the underlying complaints are not sufficiently independent from the allegations that Phusion caused or contributed to the intoxication of any person. http://j.st/FVM View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Kim v. Holder Docket: 12-1626 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Areas of Law: Immigration Law Kim, his wife Ko, and their children are citizens of South Korea who were admitted to the U.S. in 2003, as nonimmigrant visitors for pleasure. Before an extension expired, Ko, obtained an F-1 visa, changing her status to that of a nonimmigrant student. As beneficiary of his wife’s application, Kim’s status was changed to that of spouse of a nonimmigrant student. In 2006, Ko’s F-1 status and, consequently, Kim’s F-2 status, were terminated. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services stated that Ko was ineligible for reinstatement because she had stopped attending classes without informing the school of an illness that she later claimed. While Ko’s motion to reopen or reconsider was pending, Kim became the beneficiary of an approved immigrant visa as an alien worker and moved to adjust his status to that of lawful permanent resident. USCIS denied the application, finding that he was ineligible because he had failed to maintain continuous lawful status since entering the U.S. In 2009, DHS charged Kim removable under 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(1)(B). Kim argued that his failure to maintain legal status was due to circumstances beyond his control. The IJ found Kim removable. The BIA dismissed an appeal. The Seventh Circuit denied a petition for appeal. http://j.st/FVY View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Gogos v. AMS-Mech. Sys., Inc. Docket: 13-2571 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: per curiam Areas of Law: Health Law, Labor & Employment Law Gogos, a pipe welder for 45 years, has taken blood pressure medication for more than eight years. He began working for AMS in December 2012 as a welder and pipe-fitter. The next month, his blood pressure spiked and he experienced intermittent vision loss and a red eye. His supervisor agreed that he could leave to seek immediate medical treatment. As Gogos left work, he saw his general foreman and stated that he was going to the hospital because “my health is not very good lately.” The foreman immediately fired him. After pursuing a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Gogos sued. He applied to proceed in forma pauperis and requested that the court recruit counsel, stating that he cannot afford an attorney; that he has only a grammar-school education; and that English is not his primary language. The district court dismissed, reasoning that Gogos’s medical conditions were “transitory” and “suspect.” The Seventh Circuit vacated, reasoning that Gogos stated a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12112. http://j.st/FVq View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Gonzalez Docket: 13-1832 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Criminal Law In November 2010, law enforcement intercepted six railcars that crossed from Mexico into the U.S. and discovered that the railcars contained large amounts of marijuana, which had been packed into bricks. The marijuana bricks were encased in colored clay shells and hidden inside bags called “super sacks.” The officials followed the railcars to their final destination, a warehouse in Chicago Heights, and conducted surveillance of the warehouse to identify the intended recipients. A jury found Gonzalez, who assisted in unloading the cargo, guilty of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 1,000 kg or more of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846, but acquitted him of possession with intent to distribute more than 1,000 kg of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). The court subsequently entered a judgment of acquittal on the conspiracy charge. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded. The evidence was sufficient for a jury to reasonably conclude that Gonzalez knew, or at least strongly suspected that the super sacks contained illegal drugs and yet continued to participate in the operation. http://j.st/FV4 View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

United States v. Seidling Docket: 13-1854 Opinion Date: December 16, 2013 Judge: Bauer Areas of Law: Criminal Law, White Collar Crime Seidling admitted to knowingly mailing documents containing false information about service of process or publication of notice to small claims courts in Wisconsin and hiding the filings of the actions from named defendants. Seidling argued that the elements of the mail fraud statute could not be met because he never intended the false statements and misrepresentations to be communicated to the victims. The combined total intended loss amount was calculated as $370,220. None of the defendants suffered immediate pecuniary harm, but many experienced challenges in reopening the lawsuits, getting them dismissed, clearing their credit, and removing the fraudulent lawsuits from the system. The district court found him guilty of 50 counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting an argument that there was no convergence between the victims’ losses and the fraudulent statements. Although his false statements and misrepresentations were not made directly to the victims, they still satisfied the requisite materiality element of mail fraud. The court noted Seidling’s history of fraudulent behavior, his lack of remorse, and the extensive details of his scheme, and held that the district court did not err in denying a reduction in sentencing for acceptance of responsibility. http://j.st/FVk View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar

Hamilton v. Village of Oak Lawn - 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, #civilrights, #constitution, #criminal

Hamilton v. Village of Oak Lawn

Docket: 12-3174	Opinion Date: November 20, 2013
Judge: Posner
Areas of Law: Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Hamilton claimed that Lorincz, dying of Parkinson’s disease, hired her to help him at home. She was a friend of Lorincz’s daughter, a former physician who was serving jail time. After Hamilton had worked 88 hours, Lorincz gave her a check for $10,000. Hamilton told Lorincz’s other adult children, by phone, that their father was dying and had given her a $10,000 check. Knowing that Hamilton had a criminal conviction, they told the police that Hamilton was taking advantage of their impaired father and went to their father’s house. Although Lorincz told the police that he wanted Hamilton to have the money and wanted the police to leave, they remained for about two hours and learned that Hamilton had been a psychologist, but her license had been revoked after her felony conviction for a $435,000 Medicaid fraud, and that Lorincz already had professional home health aides when Hamilton had “rushed” to his side. Hamilton had a history of bizarre lawsuits against government officials. Hamilton claims that the police would not allow her to leave while they were there and, when they left, required her to leave without the check, although she wanted to stay. The district court dismissed her 42 U.S.C. 1983 suit alleging police misconduct. The Seventh Circuit affirmed.

http://j.st/yaH
View Case On: Justia  Google Scholar