In United States v. Fluitt, —- F.4th —-, No. 22-30316 (5th Cir. Apr. 24, 2024), the Fifth Circuit heard an interlocutory discovery appeal brought by a third party whose documents were disclosed over its claim of privilege. The lower court had ordered the Government to produce those materials to the defendant in his criminal case, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed that order.

In United States v. Garcia, —- F.4th —-, No. 22-40570 (5th Cir. Apr. 23, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit rejected several challenges to the defendants’ money-laundering convictions and to one of their sentences. The defendants presented multiple arguments, including insufficient evidence, failure to hold a suppression hearing, and erroneous denial of a motion for new trial.

In United States v. Garvin, No. 23-10584 (5th Cir. Apr. 19, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit rejected the defendant’s argument but also “WARNED [his counsel] that sanctions may be imposed for the filing of frivolous appeals.”

In United States v. Bailey, No. 23-50400 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit vacated the district court’s order denying Bailey’s motion for compassionate release because that court had insufficiently explained its decision.

In United States v. Brannan, —- F.4th —-, No. 23-40098 (5th Cir. Apr. 12, 2024), the Fifth Circuit affirmed the defendant’s conviction for possessing an unregistered destructive device — here, a “sealed metal pipe containing pyrotechnic material harvested from fireworks” — under 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d).

In United States v. Rosa, No. 23-10328 (5th Cir. Apr. 12, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit held that the defendant’s waiver of appeal barred him from challenging the payment schedule the district court had imposed as part of his sentence.

In United States v. Clayton, —- F.4th —-, No. 23-30231 (5th Cir. Apr. 4, 2024), the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Clayton’s motion to suppress. Clayton had raised two arguments. First, he argued that officers conducted an unconstitutional warrantless search of his Mercedes after performing a traffic stop.

In United States v. Bell, No. 23-50282 (5th Cir. Apr. 8, 2024) (unpublished), the defendant argued that his 170-month sentence was procedurally improper because the district court had ordered it to run consecutively to a state sentence and because the court had failed to provide a sufficient explanation for the sentence.

In United States v. Marcum, No. 23-10703 (5th Cir. Apr. 8, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit rejected the defendant’s argument that his sentence was improperly enhanced under USSG § 2B1.1(b)(1) based on losses caused by his codefendant.

In United States v. Roscoe, No. 23-60227 (5th Cir. Mar. 29, 2024) (unpublished), the Fifth Circuit rejected the defendant’s argument that his right to confront witnesses had been violated when the district court considered hearsay during his revocation hearing.