Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
In a tedious and labyrinthine decision involving the statutory interpretation of two different provisions of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974 (“STA”), the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Circuit had incorrectly interpreted both provisions. However, the Court also concluded that the Circuit’s twin errors canceled each other out; and ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
Here the Court finally resolved the longstanding dispute among the Circuit Courts over the correct meaning of the term “cocaine base” as used in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1), and held it includes all cocaine in its chemically basic form, not just crack cocaine.
Back in 1986, when Congress enacted the ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
Here, a sharply divided Court debated the burden of proof required to obtain a conviction under the Federal witness tampering statute, namely 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C); and ultimately chose, over a strong dissent, a “reasonable likelihood” standard.
The Federal witness tampering statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C), makes it a crime ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
[Editor's Note: Because the Court essentially decided that the main issue in this closely watched case regarding qualified immunity was “moot,” and because the Court therefore declined to rule on the underlying Fourth Amendment issue, the Court’s ruling will have limited precedential value. However, for those interested in a more ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
Here a unanimous Court held that former AG Ashcroft was immune from suit for using the Material Witness Statute as a pretext for detaining suspected terrorists; but four of the Justices raised serious questions about the Government's use of that statute.
In Al-Kidd v. Ashcroft, 580 F.3d 949 (9th Cir. ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
Here a unanimous Court held that, for purposes of determining whether a state crime qualifies as a serious drug offense under the ACCA, the district court must look to the sentence that was in effect at the time the crime was committed.
Sykes v. U.S., 564 U.S. ___, 131 S,Ct. ...
Loaded on
June 13, 2011
published in Punch and Jurists
June 13, 2011
Sykes v. U.S., 564 U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 2267 (U.S. Sup. Ct. June 9, 2011) (Justice Kennedy)
McNeill v. U.S., 563 U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 2218 (U.S. Sup. Ct. June 6, 2011) (Justice Thomas)
Both of these cases address broad and poorly defined terms that Congress used when it enacted ...