Skip navigation

U.S. v. Hancock, No. CRIM.A. 97-664 (E.D.Pa.) (95 F.Supp.2d 280) (May 5, 2000) (Judge Marvin Katz)

Here the Court declined to grant a departure based on extraordinary rehabilitation, because although the defendant's conduct in working with the disadvantaged was noteworthy, it was part of his chosen profession and not a change in behavior.

In this case the defendant was arrested and convicted for illegal possession of ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login