Here, blasting the Government's "fictive imagination", the Court held that the district court had erred in denying the defendant the right to present to the jury his defense of duress to explain why he had possessed a gun.

Judge Kozinski started his decision by stating that this case "gives fresh ...

While the government's failure to approve the DEA's seizure in this case turned on the lack of adequate notice to the claimants, the facts are illustrative of the Court's view that no undue deference should be afforded to drug-alerts by dogs to large amounts of cash, in the absence of ...

Case held that no ex post facto violation arose from the fact that revocation of sentence imposed upon defendant included both term of imprisonment and new term of supervised release.

The defendant in this case was convicted and sentenced under the law prior to the enactment of the Violent Crime ...

While the government's failure to approve the DEA's seizure in this case turned on the lack of adequate notice to the claimants, the facts are illustrative of the Court's view that no undue deference should be afforded to drug-alerts by dogs to large amounts of cash, in the absence of ...

[Editor's Note: In 1992, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 228, which became known as the Child Support Recovery Act of 1992 (CSRA). The CSRA was later amended by Congress on June 24, 1998; and the new amendments became known as the Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. ...

This decision contains a detailed review of a frequently recurring and important issue: Can a defendant qualify for an "acceptance of responsibility" sentence reduction under § 3E1.1 of the Guidelines without becoming an informer?

Here, the district judge Lafitte recited a number of reasons why he refused to grant a ...

See U.S. v. Hyde, 520 U.S. 670 (1997) where this decision was reversed because the guilty plea had been accepted. However, see also U.S. v. Alvarez-Tautimez, 160 F.3d 573, 576, n. 5 (9th Cir. 1998), where the Ninth Circuit emphasized that the Supreme Court's holding in Hyde (that a defendant ...

Case held that the pattern jury instructions used (which are set forth in the decision in full) adequately informed the jury that any predisposition by defendant to commit the crime had to precede the Government's involvement in the case.

Case held that a trial court's determination of the objects of a conspiracy for Guidelines purposes, after jury returned a general verdict which did not designate objects of conspiracy, did not violate defendant's right to trial by jury.

Here the Court held that a sentence imposed following a general verdict ...

This decision amends, in minor ways, Judge Buckley's earlier unforgettably rigid and frigid opinion, reported at 78 F.3d 610 (D.C.Cir. 1996), which was discussed at length in the April 22, 1996 issue of Punch and Jurists (Vol. 3, No. 17).

The case deals with the discretion of the sentencing court ...

The Court noted that the defendant "had admitted to long-term, daily use of marijuana, which would tend to support the conclusion that any diminished capacity me might have suffered [on the day of his crime] 'resulted from voluntary use of drugs or other intoxicants'." (Id., at 25).

Here the Court ...

Case held that a mother of three young children is not entitled to sentencing departure based on "extraordinary" circumstances.

This decision amends, in minor ways, Judge Buckley's earlier unforgettably rigid and frigid opinion, reported at 78 F.3d 610 (D.C.Cir. 1996), which was discussed at length in the April 22, 1996 ...