CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DAZHAN C. MCCALLISTER,
Defendant-Appellant.
   No. 21-4011
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Akron;
No. 5:20-cr-00653-1—Patricia A. Gaughan, Chief District Judge.
Argued: June 7, 2022
Decided and Filed: July 7, 2022
Before: McKEAGUE, NALBANDIAN, and READLER, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Officers suspected a group of men gathered in a public park of smoking marijuana. So the officers stopped many of them, including Dazhan McCallister. After the stop, an officer recovered a pistol from McCallister’s waistband. McCallister moved to suppress that evidence on the basis that the pistol was discovered after an unlawful search and seizure. The district court denied the motion, and, following final judgment, McCallister appealed. We now affirm.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LARRY CHARLES INMAN,
Defendant-Appellee.
   No. 21-1505
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids.
No. 1:19-cr-00117-1—Robert J. Jonker, Chief District Judge.
Argued: January 27, 2022
Decided and Filed: July 7, 2022
Before: BATCHELDER, WHITE, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Larry Inman is a former elected representative in the Michigan House of Representatives who was charged with criminal conduct while in office. In this appeal, we address whether his acquittal on a count of making a false statement to the FBI regarding the taking of a bribe precludes his retrial on counts of extortion and solicitation of a bribe. The appeal turns on the application of issue preclusion, also known as collateral estoppel.

For that doctrine to apply here, an issue of ultimate fact decided in Inman’s favor through his acquittal must be fatal to the subsequent prosecution. Because the jury’s acquittal on the false-statement charge did not decide any fact that necessarily precludes a verdict against Inman on the extortion and bribery-solicitation charges, we reverse the district court’s dismissal of those two counts.