The First District affirms suppression of evidence where the State could not show reasonable articulable suspicion beyond mere firearm possession to justify a Terry stop, applying People v. Aguilar.
The Fourth District affirms a felon-in-possession conviction, finding the inventory search valid despite procedural shortcomings and rejecting both facial and as-applied Second Amendment challenges under Bruen.
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed denial of a motion to arrest judgment on protective-order-violation convictions — holding that the State sufficiently proved the permanent order’s terms through testimony and a docket entry — but reversed all three convictions on ineffective-assistance grounds because defense counsel failed to seek redaction of a domestic-violence finding in the temporary protective order admitted as a trial exhibit, a finding the court had already ruled irrelevant and whose admission undermined confidence in the verdict.
The Eighth District affirmed convictions for domestic violence and aggravated menacing against EMS workers, holding that the defendant’s verbal death threats to first responders constituted separately punishable offenses from the underlying domestic assault.
The Eighth District reversed the trial court’s dismissal of a rape and kidnapping indictment for preindictment delay, holding that the defendant failed to establish actual prejudice from the 16-year gap between the offense and indictment despite the deaths of two potential witnesses.
The First District affirms attempted murder and armed habitual criminal convictions, finding the evidence sufficient and counsel not ineffective for failing to challenge certain testimony.
The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed convictions for domestic violence strangulation and harassment because the trial court failed to reread constitutional jury instructions—including the presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt—as part of its oral charge to the jury at the close of evidence, applying State v. Shine, 375 Or 112 (2026), and holding the error was plain, not harmless, and warranted discretionary correction even without a trial-level objection.
The New Mexico Court of Appeals affirmed convictions for battery, shooting at or from a motor vehicle with a firearm enhancement, and conspiracy to commit tampering with evidence — formalizing as published precedent that the firearm enhancement under NMSA 1978, § 31-18-16 does not violate double jeopardy when applied to a shooting-at-vehicle conviction, and holding for the first time in a published opinion that identifying bullet-impact marks in photographs constitutes lay, not expert, testimony.
The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed first-degree murder and aggravated assault convictions for a drive-by shooting, holding that a combined self-defense and accident-and-misfortune jury instruction was not plain error where the defendant argued self-defense at trial, explicitly agreed to the instruction three times, and the instruction expanded—rather than restricted—the jury’s basis for acquittal.
The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed convictions for felon-in-possession and possession of a stolen firearm, holding that constructive possession was proven by the owner-occupant presumption and the defendant’s own statements, that shared gang membership is admissible under MRE 616 to show a defense witness’s bias, and that a cellphone-location officer with ten years’ experience and 1,000+ extractions was properly qualified as an expert under MRE 702.