In this case the Ninth Circuit articulated a three-part inquiry to determine whether a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront a witness against her has been violated by the exclusion of evidence. The Court held that the reviewing court must inquire whether: (1) the excluded evidence was relevant; (2) there ...

Case held (before Supreme Court's decision in Muscarella) that defendant was entitled to a certificate of appealability since Government had failed to establish that defendant had a weapon within reach and therefore immediately accessible.

Salas v. United States, 139 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 1998) (Per Curiam)
United States v. Gobert, ...

Case explored at length the second exception to Teague's general rule that a petitioner is not entitled to attack collaterally a final conviction.

Court held that "Rule 404(b) is a rule of inclusion; it allows the court to admit evidence of prior bad acts unless it tends to prove only a defendant's criminal disposition." (Id., at 591).

Case held that evidence that defendant had attempted to tamper with witnesses was admissible under Rule ...

Te Court held that "coercion" for purposes of § 2G1.2(b)(1) "must at a minimium involve, conceptually speaking, an impending threat of some negative consequence that will affirmatively befall a person if he or she does not succomb to the pressure that is being exerted." (Id., at 298). Thus, under that ...

Case held that alleged unmarketability of mixture containing methamphetamine did not preclude court from including that mixture in the weight of the drugs.

Court refused to find that disctrict court abused discretion by ordering a new trial in view of the potential spill-over effects from evidence relating to charges dismissed during trial due to lack of evidence.

Court refused to find that disctrict court abused discretion by ordering a new trial in view of the potential spill-over effects from evidence relating to charges dismissed during trial due to lack of evidence.

Case rejected the defendant's argument that, after Bailey, an aidor and abettor must knowingly and intentionally aid tha abet the "use" of the gun.

In his dissent, Judge Ervin wrote: "I believe that the prolonged detention of the suitcase, coupled with the authorities' lack of diligence in pursuing their investigation, violated the defendant's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures." (Id., at 427). He also wrote that "An individual's Fourth Amendment right ...

Case held that unexplained delay of 64 days between defendant's arrival in district and first appearance before judge was unnecessary delay that required dismissal of indictment with prejudice.

Case emphasized that following the enactment of the AEDPA only "new rules" rendered retrocative by the Suprme Court may inure to the benefit of habeas petitioners.

The fur really flew in this case; and the battle is still not over. The setting for this decision was a motion by two defendants, an intervening corporation and an intervening "uncharged individual" who were collectively seeking the institution of contempt proceedings and additional relief against the United States Attorney's ...

Case held that willfully violating Rule 10b-5 does not require that the defendant knew his acts were in violation of that Rule.

Although the ruling in this case has pretty much been foreclosed by contrary decisions from virtually all the Circuits, this decision is noted because of the strong words with which Judge Harold Greene condemned the validity of waivers of appeal rights in general. Calling such agreements "contracts of adhesion", Judge ...

Disagreeing with U.S. v. McHan, 101 F.3d 1027, 1040 (4th Cir. 1996), the Court held that a district court has the authority under § 5K2.0 to depart downward to reflect a discharged state sentence taken into account in calculating the offense level.

Case held that convistion under "misappropriation theory" requires proof that defendant obtained information that was material and non-public, that he used such information, and that he breached duty owed to source of information.

The Court noted that the issue in Sandin was the procedural due process rights of prisoners placed in administrative segregation for disciplinary or punitive reasons; and in that context held that 30 days in the hole "did not present the type of atypical, siginficant deprivation in which a State might ...

Case held that defendant was not entitled to sentence reduction under § 5K2.1(b)(2) based on sporting use of gun since evidence showed that defendant possessed gun for his own protection and the protection of another.

Court held that defendant's sentence was properly enhanced on grounds that gun was used or possessed in connection with robberies even though robberies were grouped with felon in possession conviction.

"Arias argues that enhancing his sentence four levels under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(5) is expressly barred by the Sentencing Guidelines. Specifically, Arias cites U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4, which provides that the term of imprisonment for a 924(c) conviction is the sentence that is required by statute. The commentary to that guideline provides: ...

Salas v. United States, 139 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 1998) (Per Curiam)
United States v. Gobert, 139 F.3d 436 (5th Cir. 1998) (Judge Wisdom)
Wright v. United States, 139 F.3d 551 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Eschbach)

As evidenced by these three decisions, the Supreme Court's ruling in Muscarello will certainly ...

Case emphasized that following the enactment of the AEDPA only "new rules" rendered retrocative by the Suprme Court may inure to the benefit of habeas petitioners.

Although the ruling in this case has pretty much been foreclosed by contrary decisions from virtually all the Circuits, this decision is noted because of the strong words with which Judge Harold Greene condemned the validity of waivers of appeal rights in general. Calling such agreements "contracts of adhesion", Judge ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - The naked impotency, and the debilitating effect, of doling out ritualistic verbal spankings for prosecutorial misconduct.

"Recognizing a Government lawyer's role as a shepherd of justice, we must not forget that the authority of the Government lawyer does not arise from any right of the ...

Court vacated a sentence on the grounds that permitting a departure based on a codefendant's sentence would "seriously undermine the goal of nationwide uniformity in the sentencing of similar defendants for similar federal offenses." (Id., at 812).

Case explored impact of the Supreme Court's ruling in Sandin and determined that 18 days in the hole did not constitute an "atypical and significant hardship.".

Over objections of Judge Arnold, who called sentence illegal, Court refused to vacate prohibition on possession and use of alcohol, even through there was no evidence that alcohol was in any way related to crime of conviction.

Case held that when defendant is charged with possession under 21 USC § 844(a), the quantity of drugs was not a mere penalty provision to be decided by the judge since the crime could be either a felony or a misdemeanor.

Over objections of Judge Arnold, who called sentence illegal, Court refused to vacate prohibition on possession and use of alcohol, even through there was no evidence that alcohol was in any way related to crime of conviction.

Here the Eleventh Circuit affirmed an order granting new trials and new sentencing hearings in every case presided over by Judge Michael K. Moore who should have recused himself as soon as he was questioned by FBI and served with subpoena.

What happens when a Federal judge becomes the target ...

Over objections of Judge Arnold, who called sentence illegal, Court upheld six year term of supervised release.

Case held that unexplained delay of 64 days between defendant's arrival in district and first appearance before judge was unnecessary delay that required dismissal of indictment with prejudice.

Over objections of Judge Arnold, who called sentence illegal, Court refused to vacate condition that defendant was subject to warrantless search by probabtion officer to detect presence of alcohol.

Salas v. United States, 139 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 1998) (Per Curiam)
United States v. Gobert, 139 F.3d 436 (5th Cir. 1998) (Judge Wisdom)
Wright v. United States, 139 F.3d 551 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Eschbach)

As evidenced by these three decisions, the Supreme Court's ruling in Muscarello will certainly ...

This case is noted because it contains a good summary of the prevailing inter-Circuit conflict on the question of what issues may be raised at a resentencing hearing following a remand. In this case the Court was asked to decide "whether the defendant, whose case was remanded to the district ...

Every once in a while, a court will focus attention on one of those pragmatic but logically untenable products of judicial engineering that is boldly created and blindly accepted to help the Government maintain its war on drugs. The Stone case is such a decision: it addresses the issue of ...

Case held that alleged unmarketability of mixture containing methamphetamine did not preclude court from including that mixture in the weight of the drugs.

This is an interesting case dealing with the permissible grounds for denying a defendant a sentence reduction based on a mitigating role in the offense, pursuant to the provisions of U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. In this case, the district court (Judge Nesbitt) denied any role in the offense sentence reduction on ...