Case held that a prisoner may seek judicial review of a BOP prospective eligibility determination once the BOP renders its decision; it is then "ripe for consideration".

Because the stakes (and the publicity value) are normally so high, almost any case involving a defendant named Gotti will normally contain interesting tidbits - and this decision is no exception. On January 20, 1998, the very same date that the defendants in this case were indicted on a broad ...

This case is noted for its ruling that "when a prosecutor resorts to evidence outside the record in her closing argument, it implicates the defendant's Fifth Amendment right to be judged solely on the evidence admitted at trial and to introduce contrary evidence and also the defendant's Sixth Amendment right ...

Case concluded that defendant had merely forfeited (rather than waived) objections to restitution order, which permitted court to vacate order on grounds that Magistrate had failed to make specific factual findings necessary to support order.

United States v. Parsons, 141 F.3d 386 (1st Cir. 1998) (Judge Boudin)
United States v. ...

Here Judge Weinstein examined in detail the requirements of 18 USC §4241(a) and (d) as it applies to sentencing hearings and concluded that evidence of malingering warranted the conclusion that the defendant was competent to be sentenced.

Case held that violation of rule requiring court to discharge alternate jurors prior to deliberations does not require automatic mistrial.

United States v. Parsons, 141 F.3d 386 (1st Cir. 1998) (Judge Boudin)
United States v. Sclafani, 996 F.Supp. 400 (D.N.J. 1998) (Judge Orlofsky)

Both of these cases deal with common restitution issues. In Parsons, the defendant was convicted of conspiracy to commit bank fraud arising out of a construction loan ...

Case held that violations of Confrontation Clause had a substantial and injurious influence on the jury and required vacation of the conviction.

Judge Shadur once observed that "Any efforts of the lower courts in the federal system to interpret the sometimes Delphic pronouncements from the Supreme Court can on occasion ...

Here the Court explained: "A constructive amendment to the indictment occurs when "the terms of the indictment are in effect altered by the presentation of evidence and jury instructions which so modify essential elements of an offense charged that there is a substantial likelihood that the defendant may have been ...

Case held that sentencing court is not authorizied to order restitution to the FBI as a condition of supervised release.

Case held that § 851(a)(1) imposes a jurisdictional requirement granting the district court jurisdiction to enhance a defendant's sentence only when the Government files an information with the court stating the convictions to be relied upon.

In this case, the court also ruled that the district court's failure to to ...

Case held that 18 USC § 1963(d)(1)(A) does not authorize pre-trial restraint of substitute assets, citing decisions in accord in the 3rd, 5th, 8th and 9th Circuits.

Because the stakes (and the publicity value) are normally so high, almost any case involving a defendant named Gotti will normally contain interesting ...

This is a major decision in which the Court held that the testimony of a cooperating witness should have been suppressed because promises of leniency made to him, in exchange for his testimony, violated the anti-gratuity provisions of 18 USC § 201(c).

On July 3, 1998, a unanimous panel of ...

We have consistently noted that the Circuit courts have generally acknowledged that the district courts are virtually powerless to intervene when a prosecutor refuses to file a promised motion for a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, "despite meanspiritedness, or even arbitrariness, on the government's part." United States v. Romolo, ...

While court declined to vacate fine, it did confirm that fines, as a form of monetary punishment, are subject to the limitations of the Excessive Fines Clause.

Case held that, for purposes of eligibility in a drug treatment program under 18 § 3621(e)(2)(B), the offense of possession of stolen explosives is a non-violent offense.

It sure didn't take long. Last week we featured this case in which a unanimous panel of the Tenth Circuit held that the testimony of a cooperating witness should have been suppressed because promises of leniency made to him, in exchange for his testimony against the defendant, violated the anti-gratuity ...

This decision explores at length the sentencing enhancement contained in U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(4)(B) for being "in the business of receiving and selling stolen property" (known as the "fencing enhancement" or the "ITB adjustment"). The defendant pled guilty to the possession and sale of stolen cable equipment and at sentencing the ...