Court held that voluntary admission of a role in a previous bank robbery did not qualify for a sentence departure under § 5K2.16, since that was a type of public crime not covered by § 5K2.16.

In this case the Court emphasized that § 5K2.16 requires disclosure of an offense ...

In this case a panel from the Fourth Circuit held that an implied malice jury instruction which improperly shifted the burden of proof as to malice from the prosecution to the defense resulted in actual prejudice to the petitioners.

The key issue on appeal was the implied malice instruction. At ...

In this case, the Court confirmed that in the Ninth Circuit a sentence reduction based on aberrant behavior does not require that the behavior be a single spontaneous or thoughtless act involving no planning - although the court acknowledged that it does rely to some extent on the concept of ...

In 1983, James Patrasso was convicted of two counts of attempted murder. He was sentenced to a term of 60 years in prison. Since then he appealed his conviction and sentence to the Illinois Appellate Court, the Illinois Supreme Court, the Federal district court in Illinois, and finally the Court ...

This case examines the differences between § 3A1.1 in the 1993 version of the Guidelines and in the 1995 version of the Guidelines. The Court noted that Appliation Note 1 in the 1993 version explained that the sentence adjustment applied only when the defendant "targets" the vulnerable victim - whereas ...

Case held that crime of transmitting threatening communications in interstate commerce in violation of 18 USC § 875(c) requires proof of general intent only so Government need not prove that defendant intended his threat to be believed.

While the Court acknowledged that the power to reassign pending cases to different judges is an extraordinary one, it exercised that right due to flagrant and abusive interference by the district judge Hoyt in the proceedings below.

Court reversed sentence enhancement based on U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(a) because the firebomb that the defendant caused to be thrown at a police car - not a policeman - so the policeman was not a victim within the meaning of § 3A1.2(a).

The defendant in this case was charged with unlawfully ...

Case held that a conspiracy to commit robbery is a "crime of violence" which may serve as a predicate for "using" a gun under the Hobbs Act even though the underlying substantive crime was never committed.

This case involved a defendant's delivery of two handguns to a prospective robber for ...

This is one of those classic appeals arising from the conviction of many members of a "crime syndicate" - and from the opening paragraph Judge Evans had great difficulty restraining the urge to dismiss all the issues on the grounds that the defendants were simply "mobsters." One claim in particular ...

In this case the Court rejected Commerce Clause and Tenth Circuit challenges to the CSRA; but it also affirmed that to prove a violation of this statute the Government must prove that the defendant knew his duty under the law and violated it.

The Court held that in order for ...

This is one of those classic appeals arising from the conviction of many members of a "crime syndicate" - and from the opening paragraph Judge Evans had great difficulty restraining the urge to dismiss all the issues on the grounds that the defendants were simply "mobsters." One claim in particular ...

This is one of those classic appeals arising from the conviction of many members of a "crime syndicate" - and from the opening paragraph Judge Evans had great difficulty restraining the urge to dismiss all the issues on the grounds that the defendants were simply "mobsters." One claim in particular ...

This case raises two interesting issues: one dealing with the Witness Tampering Statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C), and the second dealing with drug convictions for the sale of "counterfeit substances."

The defendant was convicted of tampering with a Government informant; and on appeal his conviction was reversed. The facts are ...

Court reversed district court finding that a person was not a leader because a co-defendant played a larger role in the conspiracy.

This is one of those classic appeals arising from the conviction of many members of a "crime syndicate" - and from the opening paragraph Judge Evans had great difficulty restraining the urge to dismiss all the issues on the grounds that the defendants were simply "mobsters." One claim in particular ...

The series of majority and dissenting opinions that evolved in this 65-page long decision contain one of the most exhaustive studies we have seen concerning the historical bases for, and the underlying objectives of, the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination.

At issue was whether the defendant, a resident alien in ...

The Court held that in order for the Government to sustain a conviction under 18 USC § 228(a) and establish its willful element, it must "prove that the law imposed a duty on the defendant, that the defendant knew of this duty, and that he voluntarily violated that duty." (Id., ...

Case held that Guidelines' enhancement applies if the defendant knows that any portion of the funds he is responsible for laundering were the proceeds of illegal drug trafficking.

At sentencing in this money laundering case, the district court (Judge Covello) refused to apply the three level sentence enhancement set forth ...

This case involved a defendant's delivery of two handguns to a prospective robber for use in a robbery. The robbery never took place - and the Court addressed the question of whether the handgun had actively been employed in relation to the conspiracy. The Court stated that "the relevant question ...

This decision brings into focus some interesting questions regarding whether a sentencing court may impose an upward departure at sentencing based on conduct that was part of a count dismissed pursuant to a plea agreement; and in the process it both raises some interesting questions about the validity of that ...

This case explored the availablity of damages, under 26 U.S.C. §7217(a), for the wrongful disclosure of tax return information - even if the information was previously disclosed in a prior criminal proceeding.

Court held that a proper grounds for departure is the defendant's lack of control over, or knowledge of, the purity of the methamphetamine that he delivered; and the failure of the court to consider such grounds was not harmless error.

This case involved an appeal from the district court's refusal ...

The defendant was charged in his indictment with bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a); but when the court instructed the jury it also included elements of a § 2113(d) bank robbery offense, a more serious crime that contains elements of an assault. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit ...

In the mystical world of plea agreements, the courts often pay lip service to the "core concerns" that provide the underpinning for Rule 11 of the Fed.R.Crim.P. Those core concerns are usually listed as three: (1) the guilty plea must be free from coercion; (2) the defendant must understand the ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - Must citizens prostrate themselves before the majesty of Government?

"The fundamental value that the privilege [against self-incrimination] reflects, is intangible, it is true; but so is liberty, and so is a man's immortal soul. A man may be punished, even put to death, by the ...

In its decision, the Court emphasized that "the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers". (Id., at 228). Here, it also emphasized that it was not enough that a prison regulation merely be related to some governmental interest - it must be ...

In this case, the Seventh Circuit took a slightly different tack than many of the other Circuits in deciding whether a prisoner made a valid claim that the new provisions of the AEDPA requiring a certificate of appealability were impermissiblly retroactive: if the prisoner filed his first petition before the ...

Here the Seventh Circuit joined a majority of the Circuits in holding that the statute of limitations does not limit what actions a court may consider as relevant conduct when sentencing a defendant.

One of the issues raised in this tax evasion case was whether the district court had erred ...