Skip navigation

Punch and Jurists: April 1, 1996

Issue PDF
Volume 3, Number 14

In this issue:

  1. U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin) (p None)
  2. U.S. v. Caron, No. 94-2026 (1st Cir.) (77 F.3d 1) (February 26, 1996) (Judge Frank M. Coffin) (p None)
  3. U.S. v. Baron, No. 95-10118-NG (D.Mass.) (914 F.Supp. 660) (October 2, 1995) (Judge Nancy Gertner) (p None)
  4. U.S. v. Martinez, No. 94-50620 (9th Cir.) (77 F.3d 332) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld) (p None)
  5. U.S. v. Velez Carrero, No. 95-1351 (1st Cir.) (77 F.3d 11) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Conrad K. Cyr) (p None)
  6. U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin) (p None)
  7. U.S. v. Scarano, No. 94-10213 (9th Cir.) (76 F.3d 1471) (February 20, 1996) (Judge William J. Rea) (p None)
  8. U.S. v. Baron, No. 95-10118-NG (D.Mass.) (914 F.Supp. 660) (October 2, 1995) (Judge Nancy Gertner) (p None)
  9. U.S. v. Miller, No. 94-5951 (4th Cir.) (77 F.3d 71) (March 6, 1996) (Judge Clyde H. Hamilton) (p None)
  10. U.S. v. Kones, No. 95-1434 (3rd Cir.) (77 F.3d 66) (February 20, 1996) (Judge Walter K. Stapleton) (p None)
  11. U.S. v. Meader, No. 95-25-B-H (D.Me.) (914 F.Supp. 656) (February 12, 1996) (Judge D. Brock Hornby) (p None)
  12. U.S. v. Meader, No. 95-25-B-H (D.Me.) (914 F.Supp. 656) (February 12, 1996) (Judge D. Brock Hornby) (p None)
  13. U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin) (p None)
  14. U.S. v. Martinez, No. 94-50620 (9th Cir.) (77 F.3d 332) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld) (p None)

U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin)

In reviewing one of the many sentencing issues involved in this case, the Third Circuit reversed a restitution order on the grounds that the lower court had failed to make the findings of fact as required by its prior decisions in U.S. v. Logar, 975 F.2d 958 (3rd Cir. 1992) ...

U.S. v. Caron, No. 94-2026 (1st Cir.) (77 F.3d 1) (February 26, 1996) (Judge Frank M. Coffin)

This en banc decision reverses both a prior decision in the same case (U.S. v. Caron, 64 F.3d 713 (1st Cir. 1995) and an earlier decision on the same issues, U.S. v. Ramos, 961 F.2d 1003 (1st Cir. 1992). It addresses the labyrinthine language contained in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20) ...

U.S. v. Baron, No. 95-10118-NG (D.Mass.) (914 F.Supp. 660) (October 2, 1995) (Judge Nancy Gertner)

On of the interesting aspect of this decision is that the Court observed that there are some defendants for whom prison incarceration makes no sense at all.

U.S. v. Martinez, No. 94-50620 (9th Cir.) (77 F.3d 332) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld)

Prior to this appeal, the district court (Judge Marshall) dismissed an indictment for excessive pre-indictment delay because she concluded that the defendant had made an actual showing or prejudice since the delay had prevented the offenses from being grouped under U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2, which effectively increased the total sentence that ...

U.S. v. Velez Carrero, No. 95-1351 (1st Cir.) (77 F.3d 11) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Conrad K. Cyr)

Case held that "because plea bargaining requires defendants to waive fundamental constitutional rights, we hold prosecutors engaging in plea bargaining to 'the most meticulous standards of both promise and performance'." (Id. At 11).

This is a rare case in which a sentence was vacated because the Court agreed with the ...

U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin)

Case held that the Guidelines do not prohibit applying sentence enhancements under both § 2F1.1(b)(4)(B) - formerly codified at § 2F1.1(b)(3)(B) - and § 3B1.3 of the Guidelines.

U.S. v. Scarano, No. 94-10213 (9th Cir.) (76 F.3d 1471) (February 20, 1996) (Judge William J. Rea)

Based on the Supreme Court's holding in Witte v. U.S., 515 U.S. 389, the Ninth Circuit reversed its prior precedent and held that double jeopardy is not violated when court considers a pre-Guidelines loss twice for two different sentences.

One of the issues raised in this case was whether double ...

U.S. v. Baron, No. 95-10118-NG (D.Mass.) (914 F.Supp. 660) (October 2, 1995) (Judge Nancy Gertner)

This is one of those crazy cases that shows the bountiful compassion of the Bureau of Prisons. A 76 year old defendant was convicted of bank fraud. His counsel moved for a downward departure from his sentencing range of 27 to 33 months and asked the court to impose a ...

U.S. v. Miller, No. 94-5951 (4th Cir.) (77 F.3d 71) (March 6, 1996) (Judge Clyde H. Hamilton)

Here the Court explained that the purpose of the enhancement contained in § 2B5.1(b)(2) is to provide harsher sentences for individuals who possess counterfeiting devices and produce counterfeit instruments, rather than persons who merely pass counterfeit obligations. Thus the enhancement does not apply to individuals who merely photocopy notes that ...

U.S. v. Kones, No. 95-1434 (3rd Cir.) (77 F.3d 66) (February 20, 1996) (Judge Walter K. Stapleton)

The defendant in this case was a medical doctor licensed to practice medicine in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania when a grand jury indicted him on 200 counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Specifically, the indictment alleged that Kones had submitted over $1,000,000 in false insurance ...

U.S. v. Meader, No. 95-25-B-H (D.Me.) (914 F.Supp. 656) (February 12, 1996) (Judge D. Brock Hornby)

Judge Hornby reviewed the elements of both the insanity defense (under Rule 12.2 and under 18 U.S.C. § 17(b)) and the diminished capacity defense as defined in numerous reported cases. He noteed that "Federal law is clear that a defendant must prove his insanity defense by 'clear and convincing evidence'.". ...

U.S. v. Meader, No. 95-25-B-H (D.Me.) (914 F.Supp. 656) (February 12, 1996) (Judge D. Brock Hornby)

Case held that a psychologist could testify as to defendant's mental condition at time crime was committed, but that such testimony alone was not sufficient to submit insanity defense to the jury.

U.S. v. Maurello, No. 95-5109 (3rd Cir.) (76 F.3d 1304) (February 22, 1996) (Judge H. Lee Sarokin)

This case contains a lengthy and detailed description of the determination of "loss" under both § 2B1.1 and § 2F1.1 of the Guidelines - particularly in the context of the Third Circuit's somewhat controversial and much discussed decision in U.S. v. Kopp, 951 F.2d 521 (3rd Cir. 1991). In this ...

U.S. v. Martinez, No. 94-50620 (9th Cir.) (77 F.3d 332) (February 27, 1996) (Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld)

Prior to this appeal, the district court (Judge Marshall) dismissed an indictment for excessive pre-indictment delay because she concluded that the defendant had made an actual showing or prejudice since the delay had prevented the offenses from being grouped under U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2, which effectively increased the total sentence that ...