Skip navigation

Punch and Jurists: June 27, 2005

Issue PDF
Volume 12, Number 26

In this issue:

  1. U.S. v. Copeland, No. 01-CR-1453 (E.D.N.Y.) (369 F.Supp.2d 275) (May 4, 2005) (Judge Jack B. Weinstein) (p None)
  2. U.S. v. Basciano, No. 05-CR-0060 (NGG) (E.D.N.Y.) (369 F.Supp.2d 344) (May 5, 2005) (Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis) (p None)
  3. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 04-5393 (D.C. Cir.) (415 F.3d 33) (July 15, 2005) (Judge A. Raymond Randolph) (p None)
  4. U.S. v. Blech, No. 02 Cr. 122 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y.) (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12976) (June 28, 2005) (Judge John G. Koeltl) (p None)

U.S. v. Copeland, No. 01-CR-1453 (E.D.N.Y.) (369 F.Supp.2d 275) (May 4, 2005) (Judge Jack B. Weinstein)

The defendant in this case was charged with illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a); and, after a complex procedural history including an earlier remand from the Second Circuit, Judge Weinstein was required to determine whether the defendant had shown that there was a “reasonable probability” ...

U.S. v. Basciano, No. 05-CR-0060 (NGG) (E.D.N.Y.) (369 F.Supp.2d 344) (May 5, 2005) (Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis)

The defendant is this case, Vincent Basciano, a reputed crime boss of the Bonnano family, was incarcerated at the BOP’s MCC facility in Manhattan, where he was being held indefinitely in solitary confinement. Even though he was a pretrial detainee, the Government contended that such restrictions were necessary to prevent ...

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, No. 04-5393 (D.C. Cir.) (415 F.3d 33) (July 15, 2005) (Judge A. Raymond Randolph)

In November, 2004, Judge Robertson (D.D.C.) ordered an immediate halt to one of the military trials of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay "until a competent tribunal determines that the petitioner is not entitled to the protections afforded prisoners of war [by] the Geneva Convention." (See, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 344 F.Supp.152 ...

U.S. v. Blech, No. 02 Cr. 122 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y.) (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12976) (June 28, 2005) (Judge John G. Koeltl)

Defendant filed a motion for correction of sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a) or, in alternative, for reconsideration because of alleged arithmetical, technical, or other clear error in his sentence of 72 months imprisonment.

Both motions were based on the alleged failure of the court to grant a ...