Case held that the Government does not violate the Jencks Act by instructing all but most senior prosecutors to refrain from taking notes during pretrial interviews.

Court observed that the Supreme Court "has yet to plot the crossroads at which the Confrontation Clause and the hearsay principles embedded in the Evidence Rules intersect".

This case is noted in part because it is vintage Judge Selya and in part because it considers two important questions of first ...

In reversing the defendant's conviction after the prosecution used peremptory challenges to exclude nine of ten Blacks from the jury, the Court held that even a single improper removal of a juror based on race violates the Fourteenth Amendment.

United States v. Taylor, 92 F.3d 1313 (2nd Cir. 1996) (Judge ...

Here the Court reversed a gun conviction due to the failure of the district court adequately to notify the defendant of the nature of the charges to which he pleading guilty in violation of Fed.R.Crim.P 11(c)(1).

This is one of those enigmatic decisions in which the D.C. Circuit reversed a ...

As stated in U.S. v. Stoneman, 870 F.2d 102, 105-06 (3rd Cir. 1989), the Writ of Coram Nobis "is used to attack allegedly invalid convictions which have continuing consequences, when the petitioner has served his sentence and is no longer 'in custody' for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2255." ...

Government has no duty to disclose to defendant at time he pleads guilty which relevant conduct will be used to enhance sentence.

In this case the Second Circuit held that an appeal from a Rule 35(b) Motion is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and not by 28 U.S.C. § 1291. However, it acknowledged that the Circuits have split on this question, with the First Circuit holding that § 1291 governs an ...

Case held that district court's failure to dismiss alternate jurors once deliberations began was not reversible error.

This is one of those rare cases in which a Court of Appeals reversed a decision by a district court to deny the defendant a sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. The somewhat hard-nosed Judge Tanner, ignoring the fact that the defendant did not speak English ...

United States v. Neal, 93 F.3d 219 (6th Cir. 1996) (Judge Suhrheinrich)
Tamayo v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 932 F.Supp. 342 (D.D.C. 1996) (Judge Harris)
Granse v. United States, 932 F.Supp. 1162 (D.Minn. 1996) (Judge Kyle)

Perhaps the most surprising thing about these decisions is that they were published at ...

Case held that although defendant did not actively "use" a gun in connection with his marijuana crime, he could be charged with a weapon enhancement under § 2K2.1(b)(5) under the "possession" prong of 18 USC § 924(c).

One of the critical Guidelines issues raised in this case was whether the ...

Case affirmed trial court's discretion to permit use of fragmentary statements so long as it determines that they are not misleading or prejudicial.

In case where petitioner claimed that prosecutor breached terms of plea agreement, the Court firmly held that petitioner is entitled to relief "regardless of whether the government's conduct actually affected the sentencing judge (id. at 693).

Here the Court held that "taken as a whole, the prosecutor's comments here appear ...

This decision focuses on one of the increasingly common tactics used by law enforcement officials at the time of their "raids" to collect evidence - namely titillating the press by recording the uncom mon bravery of the stalwart officers for national television without regard for the privacy rights of those ...

This was the first and only Circuit to hold that the Federal carjacking statute (18 USC § 2119) was a specific intent statute and that the Government failed to meet its burden of proof by showing that defendant's intent was conditional.

Case held that 18 USC § 922(c) was constitutional as a valid exercise of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.

Here the Court held that a defendant's ignorance of the mens rea element of the offense with which he is charged renders his guilty plea involuntary as a matter of constitutional law.

This is one of those enigmatic decisions in which the D.C. Circuit reversed a gun conviction based on ...

The Eleventh Circuit holds that uncharged conduct that occurred outside the statute of limitations period can be considered as relevant conduct to enhance a sentence; and in the process it cites decisions from Second, Fifth, Sixth, Tenth and D.C. Circuits which it says are in accord.

Uncharged conduct could be ...

United States v. Taylor, 92 F.3d 1313 (2nd Cir. 1996) (Judge Feinberg)
Coulter v. Gramley, 93 F.3d 394 (7th Cir. 1996) (Judge Wood)

As our criminal justice system continues to polarize the races by imprisoning larger and larger percentages of the Black male population, these two cases are harbingers of ...