U.S. v. Kentz, No. 00-50186 (9th Cir.) (251 F.3d 835) (June 1, 2001) (Judge Pamela Ann Rymer)
Loaded on June 1, 2001
published in Punch and Jurists
June 25, 2001
Filed under:
Punch And Jurists,
Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
Here the Court held that the imposition of a sentence pursuant to 18 USC § 3147 (which provides for an enhanced penalty if the crime was committed while the defendant was on release ) did not violate the Apprendi rule.
The defendant in this case was convicted on 21 counts ...
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
More from this issue:
- U.S. v. Estrada, No. 00-2647 (7th Cir.) (256 F.3d 466) (June 22, 2001) (Judge Joel L. Flaum)
- U.S. v. Kentz, No. 00-50186 (9th Cir.) (251 F.3d 835) (June 1, 2001) (Judge Pamela Ann Rymer)
- U.S. v. Levy, No. 00-3170 (6th Cir.) (250 F.3d 1015) (May 22, 2001) (Judge Eugene E. Jr. Siler)
- U.S. v. Gonzalez, No. 00-40572 (5th Cir.) (250 F.3d 923) (May 3, 2001) (Judge Carolyn Dineen King)
- U.S. v. Brown, No. 00-30953 (5th Cir.) (250 F.3d 907) (May 1, 2001) (Judge Edith H. Jones)
- U.S. v. Brown, No. 99-2120 (1st Cir.) (251 F.3d 286) (June 5, 2001) (Judge Norman H. Stahl)
- U.S. v. Espinoza, No. 00-3090 (7th Cir.) (256 F.3d 718) (July 11, 2001) (Judge John L. Coffey)
- U.S. v. Ray, No. 00-2392 (8th Cir.) (250 F.3d 596) (May 8, 2001) (Judge Diana E. Murphy)
- Saffold v. Newland, No. 99-15541 (9th Cir.) (250 F.3d 1262) (July 17, 2000) (Judge Jr. William C. Canby)
- Nat'l Council of Resistance of Iran v. Dept. of State, No. 99-1438 (D.C. Cir.) (251 F.3d 192) (June 8, 2001) (Judge David B. Sentelle)
- U.S. v. Jordan, No. 97-10255 (9th Cir.) (256 F.3d 922) (July 5, 2001) (Judge Ronald M. Gould)
- U.S. v. Estrada, No. 00-2647 (7th Cir.) (256 F.3d 466) (June 22, 2001) (Judge Joel L. Flaum)
- Lattimore v. Dubois, No. Civ. No. 97-11011-NG (D.Mass.) (152 F.Supp.2d 67) (July 13, 2001) (Judge Nancy Gertner)
- U.S. v. True, No. 99-5111 (6th Cir.) (250 F.3d 410) (May 17, 2001) (Judge Richard F. Suhrheinrich)
More from these topics:
- Washington Supreme Court: Nonexceptional Consecutive Terms of ‘Community Custody’ May Not Exceed Aggregate Term of 24 Months, May 15, 2024. Parole, Probation, Parole & Supervised Release, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences, Multiple Sentences, Aggregate Sentence.
- Sixth Circuit: Sentence Procedurally Unreasonable Where District Court Failed to Explain Decision to Impose Consecutive Sentences and Substantively Unreasonable Where Court Improperly Weighed Sentencing Factors, Oct. 1, 2023. Failure to Explain Consequences, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences, Impermissible Factors.
- Supreme Court of California: After Amendments to Three Strikes Law, Courts Retain Concurrent Sentencing Discretion for Qualifying Offenses Committed on Same Occasion or Arising From Same Operative Facts, Sept. 1, 2023. Three Strikes, Three Strikes Statutes/Rule, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
- SCOTUS Announces § 924(c)(1)(D)(ii)’s Consecutive Sentence Mandate Not Applicable to § 924(j) Sentences, Aug. 1, 2023. Murder/Felony Murder, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
- Hawaii Supreme Court Rules That Time Served for Concurrent Sentences Can Be Counted Only Once for Sentence Credit, April 24, 2023. Credits, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
- Montana Supreme Court Grants State Prisoner 604 Days in Sentence Credit, April 1, 2023. Credits, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
- Fifth Circuit: Consecutive Sentence for FTA Must Be Part of ‘Total Punishment,’ Not Merely a Stacked Sentence, Nov. 15, 2020. Total Punishment, Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences.
- Michigan Supreme Court Announces Court Must Inform Defendant of Consecutive Sentencing Authority When Accepting Plea, July 15, 2020. Concurrent and Consecutive Sentences, Plea Agreements/Guilty Pleas.
- Mattox v. U.S., No. 667 (U.S. Supreme Court) (156 U.S. 237; 15 S.Ct. 337) (February 4, 1995) (Justice Brown), March 27, 2019. Punch And Jurists, Confrontation Clause/Rights.
- Price v. Johnston, No. 111 (U.S. Supreme Court) (334 U.S. 266; 68 S.Ct. 1049) (May 24, 2048) (Justice Murphy), March 27, 2019. Punch And Jurists, Right to be Present.