Skip navigation

Punch and Jurists: November 26, 2012

Issue PDF
Volume 19, Number 24

In this issue:

  1. U.S. v. Maloney, No. 11-50311 (9th Cir.) (699 F.3d 1130) (November 14, 2012) (Judge N. Randy Smith) (p None)
  2. U.S. v. Godat, No. 11-3536 (8th Cir.) (688 F.3d 399) (August 8, 2012) (Judge Raymond W. Gruender) (p None)
  3. Vance v. Rumsfeld, No. 10-1687 (7th Cir.) (701 F.3d 193) (November 7, 2012) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook) (p None)
  4. U.S. v. Corey, No. 12-20184-CR (S.D.Fla.) (861 F.Supp.2d 1341) (May 16, 2012) (Judge Federico A. Moreno) (p None)
  5. U.S. v. Bout, No. 08 CR 365(SAS) (S.D.N.Y.) (860 F.Supp.2d 303) (February 24, 2012) (Judge Shira A. Scheindlin) (p None)

U.S. v. Maloney, No. 11-50311 (9th Cir.) (699 F.3d 1130) (November 14, 2012) (Judge N. Randy Smith)

John Maloney was arrested at a highway checkpoint in Imperial County, CA near the Mexican border, after a drug dog alerted to drugs hidden in the cab of the truck. During an ensuing search, Border Patrol Agents discovered 112 sealed packages containing 146 kilograms of marijuana. After Maloney was indicted ...

U.S. v. Godat, No. 11-3536 (8th Cir.) (688 F.3d 399) (August 8, 2012) (Judge Raymond W. Gruender)

This case addresses - but does not resolve - two very interesting sentencing questions:

(a) whether Rule 32(e)(3) of the Fed.R.Crim.P., which permits a district court to order the Probation Office “not to disclose to anyone other than the court the officer's recommendation on the sentence” - facially violates the ...

Vance v. Rumsfeld, No. 10-1687 (7th Cir.) (701 F.3d 193) (November 7, 2012) (Judge Frank H. Easterbrook)

In Vance v. Rumsfeld, 694 F.Supp.2d 957 (N.D.Ill. March 5, 2010) (P&J, 03/22/10) (“Vance I”), District Judge Wayne Anderson addressed the claims of two U.S. citizens and civilians, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, who were working a private contractors in Iraq and who claimed they were unjustly imprisoned and tortured ...

U.S. v. Corey, No. 12-20184-CR (S.D.Fla.) (861 F.Supp.2d 1341) (May 16, 2012) (Judge Federico A. Moreno)

In Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the Supreme Court announced its landmark analytical approach to the Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment in cases involving custodial interrogations. After noting that the advent of modern custodial police interrogation had brought with it an increased concern about confessions obtained by ...

U.S. v. Bout, No. 08 CR 365(SAS) (S.D.N.Y.) (860 F.Supp.2d 303) (February 24, 2012) (Judge Shira A. Scheindlin)

In America, it has become a cardinal operating principle of the courts that they will rarely interfere with the decisions of prison administrators about prison conditions - no matter how harsh or arbitrary those conditions may appear to be. And that guiding principle has become virtually immutable, in large part ...