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.
Already a subscriber? Login