David Rasmussen Hansen

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit circuit Appointed by George H. W. Bush (Republican) 28 signed orders read

How Judge Hansen decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Hansen evaluated warrant affidavits cumulatively instead of isolating each fact.

“Even if the individual facts alleged in the affidavits would not alone have established probable cause, viewed together they provided enough credibility and support for the warrants to issue.”

He required sentencing courts themselves to set concrete restitution schedules.

“We interpret this statement to require the district court to set a detailed payment schedule at sentencing.”

Procedural preferences

He enforced appellate-jurisdiction limits before reaching the merits.

“Because we lack jurisdiction to review this decision, we dismiss this appeal.”

He treated a knowing waiver of plea-statement protections as enforceable absent evidence that the agreement was involuntary.

“[A]bsent some affirmative indication that the agreement was entered into unknowingly or involuntarily, an agreement to waive the exclusionary provisions of the plea-statement Rules is valid and enforceable.”

Cautions

He declined to impose a new procedural default where the state had not regularly required the omitted step.

“There was no firmly established state practice in Missouri of insisting on the exhaustion of discretionary review; to the contrary, the State had consistently asserted that the exhaustion of discretionary review was unnecessary.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Richmond v. Shalala
93-2720 · 1994-05-11
Appeal (benefits claimant appellant) Denied

“Having fully considered and rejected all of Richmond's claims on appeal, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Secretary.”

Whitmore v. Gaines
94-2142 · 1994-05-11
Appeal (death-row prisoner appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and deny as moot Whitmore's motion for stay of execution pending appeal.”

Knoefler v. United Bank of Bismarck
93-1844 · 1994-05-13
Appeal (appellants) Moot / procedural

“Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed.”

Wright v. General Dynamics Corp.
102-166 · 1994-05-20
Appeal (employment plaintiff appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of Wright’s motion to amend and supplement her complaint.”

Frederickson v. Wood
· 1996-06-24
Appeal (habeas petitioner appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”

Ivy v. Bowersox
· 1997-09-04
Appeal (habeas petitioner appellant) Denied

“Thus, we affirm the judgment of the district court. The petitioner’s pending motions are denied.”

Holland v. Apfel
· 1998-08-12
Appeal (benefits claimant appellant) Denied

“Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”

McRoberts v. Bowersox
· 2000-12-08
Appeal (habeas petitioner appellant) Denied

“Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”

United States v. McGlothlin
00-2695 · 2001-05-08
Appeal (defendant appellant) Granted in part

“Accordingly, we vacate and remand the restitution order with instructions for the district court to impose a detailed restitution payment schedule to commence while McGlothlin is incarcerated.”

Smith v. American States Preferred Insurance Co.
· 2001-05-14
Appeal (insurer appellant) Moot / procedural

“For the foregoing reasons, we dismiss the appeal.”

Beck v. LaFleur
00-1983 · 2001-07-16
Appeal (prisoner appellant) Denied

“We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court.”

United States v. Villalpando
01-1191 · 2001-08-07
Appeal (government appellant) Granted in part

“Accordingly, we affirm the order of the district court granting Alejandro Villalpando a new trial on Count 1. We reverse the grant of a new trial on Counts 3 and 4 and remand to the district court with directions to enter a judgment of conviction on each of those counts, and for sentencing thereon.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Not applicable to this circuit-court record.

Put Judge Hansen's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Hansen actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Hansen's own signed orders and cites them.