eBriefs June 24, 2019

MONDAY, JUNE 24, 2019

 

U.S. Supreme Court

Criminal Law and Procedure

A trial court committed a clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a black prospective juror during a defendant’s sixth criminal trial was not motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent where the state had tried to strike all 36 black prospective jurors over the course of the first four trials, and the state was following the same pattern at the sixth trial.

Flowers v. Mississippi; filed June 21, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//17-9572_k536

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-9572

 

Criminal Law and Procedure

In a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §922(g) and §924(a)(2), the government must prove both that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm.

Rehaif v. United States; filed June 21, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//17-9560_e2p3

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-9560

 

Government Law

A government violates the Takings Clause when it takes property without compensation, and a property owner may bring a Fifth Amendment claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 at that time; the precedent set by Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, requiring that property owners seek just compensation under state law in state court before bringing a federal takings claim under §1983, is overruled.

Knick v. Township of Scott; filed June 21, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//17-647_m648

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-647

 

Taxation

The presence of in-state beneficiaries alone does not empower a state to tax trust income that has not been distributed to the beneficiaries where the beneficiaries have no right to demand that income and are uncertain to receive it.

North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberly Rice Kastner 1992 Family Trust; filed June 21, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//18-457_2034

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-457

 

California Court of Appeal

Constitutional Law

The exterior, unticketed areas of an amusement park are a public forum for expressive activity under the California Constitution.

Park Management Corp. v. In Defense of Animals (Cuviello); First District, Div. Two; filed June 20, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//A148425

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2923

 

Real Property

Language in the covenants, conditions and restrictions for a property limiting construction to a single-story home unless approval was granted by the architectural committee and the developer was not applicable to alterations to the home after a second story was approved and erected; the absence of an entity with the authority to review and approve building plans nullifies that requirement as a precondition to proceeding with renovations and remodeling.

Eisen v. Tavangarian; Second District, Div. Seven; filed June 20, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//B278271

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2930

 

Modification

People v. Gentile; Fourth District, Div. Two; filed June 20, 2019

http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0619//E069088M

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 2939