CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SIDNEY DOWL,
Defendant-Appellant.
   No. 19-2469
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:16-cr-20568-1—Paul D. Borman, District Judge.
Decided and Filed: April 22, 2020
Before: SUTTON, McKEAGUE, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

PER CURIAM. When Sidney Dowl violated the terms of his supervised release, the district court sent him back to prison for 11 months. During Dowl’s revocation hearing, the district court gave him several opportunities to explain his conduct and offer evidence in mitigation. But it never directly solicited Dowl to ask if he wanted to make a statement on his behalf, what’s called an opportunity for allocution. Dowl did not raise any objection during his revocation hearing, even after being given a chance to do so at the end of it. Reviewing his denial-of-allocution claim for plain error, we affirm.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
JEFFREY QUEEN,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY; DUSTIN ROCKROHR,
Defendants-Appellants.
   No. 18-5840
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green.
No. 1:16-cv-00131—Joseph H. McKinley, Jr., District Judge.
Argued: March 21, 2019
Decided and Filed: April 22, 2020
Before: BOGGS, GIBBONS, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Jeffrey Queen sued his former employer, the City of Bowling Green (“the City”), and a former supervisor, Dustin Rockrohr, asserting violations of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (“KCRA”) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). This appeal concerns whether the district court correctly denied summary judgment to the City and Rockrohr on certain KCRA claims, holding that they were not entitled to qualified immunity. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to the City as to the claims for hostile work environment based on religion and for retaliation and AFFIRM the district court’s denial of qualified immunity to Rockrohr for the retaliation claim.