In her dissent, Judge Rovner acknowledged that while the majority's holding might be defensible under the new version of the Guidelines (which became effective Nov. 1, 1997), its holding was wrong under the Guidelines in effect at time of sentencing because there was no "express" threat of death.

Case held ...

United States v. Midgley, 142 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 1998) (Judge Roth)
United States v. Anderson, 995 F.Supp. 944 (D.D.Ill. 1998) (Judge Mills)

Both of these cases deal with the statutes of limitation - and, even though both cases relied on the same line of Supreme Court decisions, they show ...

Case held that transactions occuring within the statute of limitations period were separate "executions" that brought entire scheme within the 10 year statute of limitations.

United States v. Midgley, 142 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 1998) (Judge Roth)
United States v. Anderson, 995 F.Supp. 944 (D.D.Ill. 1998) (Judge Mills)

Both of ...

This is a case that simmers with intrigue. Essentially, over the strong objections of the Government, Judge Kovachevich ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the defendant had been denied effective assistance of counsel due to defense counsel's "inordinate" concern for the welfare of the co- defendants to the detriment ...

Not surprisingly, Judge Mills denied a downward departure in this case based on the defendant's age (unspecified), his post conviction rehabilitation efforts, and his physical condition (sleep apnea); but the case is noted principally because, in justification of his decision, Judge Mills cited one of the classic Guidelines cases of ...

The majority defined "mutually antagonistic defenses" as those which "force the jury to disbelieve the core of on defense in order to believe the core of the other." (Id., at 896). In his dissent, Judge Lay argued that to urge that the defenses asserted in this case were not irreconcibable ...

Case held that prison officials had no reasonable suspicion to strip search detainee after pat down search revealed no contraband; and that mere suspicion that detainee was under influence of drugs or alcohol did not provide adequate justification.

Citing Cottrell v. Kaysville City, Utah, 994 F.2d 730 (10th Cir. 1993), ...

Famous quote from Judge Brown about the excessive use of informers in criminal justice.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - When enough is enough!

"[R]ecognized as is the role of informer in the enforcement of criminal laws, there comes a time when enough is more than enough -- it is just ...

In this case of first impression, the court analogized the Major Fraud Act with the bank fraud statute which, it noted, punishes each execution of a fraudulent scheme rather than each act in furtherance of such a scheme. Based on that foundation, the court had no difficulty concluding that the ...

Case held that when a sentence is vacated under § 2255 in light of Bailey, the Government is permitted to reinstate charges it originally dismissed pursuant to a plea agreement under the contract law doctrine of frustration of purpose.

Here the Court held that various strip searches of inmates do not violate either the Fourth or the Eighth Amendments, absent any evidence that the searches were performed for the purposes of harassment or punishment.

The majority stated that "given the considerable deference [discretion?] prison officials enjoy to run their ...

Although the statute authorizing "special parole" (18 U.S.C. § 841(c)) was repealed in 1984, and although the Parole Commission no longer exists, this case is noted for its summary of the split among Circuits about whether the Parole Commission had the authority to reimpose a term of special parole - ...

Case held that BOP's revised regulations defining crimes of violence constituted a permissible interpretation of the statute and did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause.

In this case, the defendant was convicted of child pornography and his Guideline sentencing range called for a minimum sentence of 21 months incarceration. He moved for a downward departure based on his particular susceptibility to abuse in prison. After an evidentiary hearing, the Court concluded that such a departure ...

Here the Court held that the IIRIRA withdrew the jurisdiction of district courts to hear a habeas petition by an alien who sought to appeal an immigration judge's determination that she was excludable.

In this case, the defendant was convicted of child pornography and his Guideline sentencing range called for a minimum sentence of 21 months incarceration. He moved for a downward departure based on his particular susceptibility to abuse in prison. After an evidentiary hearing, the Court concluded that such a departure ...

In this case, the defendant was convicted of child pornography and his Guideline sentencing range called for a minimum sentence of 21 months incarceration. He moved for a downward departure based on his particular susceptibility to abuse in prison. After an evidentiary hearing, the Court concluded that such a departure ...

Case held that a defendant's refusal to testify at criminal proceedings involving co-conspirators precluded him from receiving the benefit of a "safety valve" sentence reduction.

The question presented in this case was whether a defendant's refusal to testify at criminal proceedings involving co-conspirators precluded him from receiving the benefit of ...

Court rejected a motion to dismiss an indictment based on allegations that the prosecutor had, knowingly, negligently and with reckless disregard for the truth, presented false evidence to the grand jury.

In this case the Court ruled that the prosecutor did not have a duty to call to the grand ...

Case held that a pre-trial detention of 28 months, with further delays possible, did not violate defendant's due process rights.

Court held that it was not sufficient to look solely at the length of detention "without more" to determine the due process issues. While a long delay between arrest and ...

On a remand from the Seventh Circuit, the court held that the proper Guidelines section for grouping mail fraud and money laundering counts was § 3D1.2(d), not § 3D1.2(b) as the defendant contended.

Case held that following a successful Bailey-type appeal, the Government could not reinstate charges that had originally been dismissed in the plea agreement and were now outside the applicable statute of limitations period.

United States v. Midgley, 142 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 1998) (Judge Roth)
United States v. Anderson, 995 ...

Case held that following a successful Bailey-type appeal, the Government could not reinstate charges that had originally been dismissed in the plea agreement and were now outside the applicable statute of limitations period.

United States v. Midgley, 142 F.3d 174 (3rd Cir. 1998) (Judge Roth)
United States v. Anderson, 995 ...

Court ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine if defense counsel had shown an excessive concern for the welfare of the defendant's co-defendants to the point of substantial prejudice.

This is a case that simmers with intrigue. Essentially, over the strong objections of the Government, Judge Kovachevich ordered an evidentiary hearing ...

Court rejected a motion to dismiss an indictment based on allegations that the prosecutor had, knowingly, negligently and with reckless disregard for the truth, presented false evidence to the grand jury.

In this case the Court ruled that the prosecutor did not have a duty to call to the grand ...