As the nation remains engulfed in its efforts to cut costs and reduce expenses wherever politically easy, we are beginning to see the effects of those efforts on the nation's criminal justice system. Despite the race to incarcerate more and more people, the sinister and mislabeled Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death …

The sole issue in this case was the proper interpretation of a provision in the Insanity Defense Reform Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 4241-47). The provision in question, § 4244(d), authorizes the court to commit a defendant in a criminal case to a mental institution, in lieu of being sentenced to …

Case held that when the defendant asserted a "mere presence" defense, he challanged both his knowledge and intent, thereby allowing admission of prior arrests and convictions offered to show intent and knowledge.

Case held that uncharged amounts of drugs in a drug conspiracy mat be attributed to a defendant as relevant conduct even if he never actually possessed or distributed the drugs.

This case raises two significant issues - neither of which can really be gleaned from a reading of the bland and dulcet tones of the Court's decision. For that reason, we have posted on the Internet defense counsel's brief which amplifies those two issues - one dealing with a defendant's …

Court held that right of allocution applies only to original sentence and not to subsequent resentencing.

Here the Court acknowledged that "Supervised release is punishment; it is the deprivation of some small portion of one's liberty imposed as a punitive measure for a bad act." (Id., at 1134).

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - Forget the trial errors. Speedy convictions are what we need because "the quest for the perfect is the enemy of the good."

"Perfection is elusive. Appellate courts long ago ceased to be citadels of technicality and began to ask whether a particular error implies that …

Court ruled the district court had authority to impose drug testing and counseling as a condition of supervised release.

Case reversed possession conviction because the court failed to instruct the jury on proper venue.

Case held that attempts to conceal funds during criminal tax investigation supported an obstruction of justice enhancement.

Court rejected a claim that the term "affected" in U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1(b)(6)(B) was unconstitutionally vague.

This disturbing en banc decision consolidates and re-addresses appeals in three separate, previous decisions - namely, Ayala v. Speckard, 89 F.3d 91 (2nd Cir. 1996) ("Ayala I"); Okonkwo v. Lacy, 104 F.3d 21 (2nd Cir. 1997); and Pearson v. James, 105 F.3d 828 (2nd Cir. 1997). All three of those …

Case held that a five year delay in prosecution of civil forfeiture did not violate defendant's due process rights.

This disturbing en banc decision consolidates and re-addresses appeals in three separate, previous decisions - namely, Ayala v. Speckard, 89 F.3d 91 (2nd Cir. 1996) ("Ayala I"); Okonkwo v. Lacy, 104 F.3d 21 (2nd Cir. 1997); and Pearson v. James, 105 F.3d 828 (2nd Cir. 1997). All three of those …

The petitioner in this case was convicted of a murder that took place more than 20 years ago, in 1977. He was convicted and sentenced to death - and now, after all that time, the Sixth Circuit vacated his conviction on the grounds that he was denied his Sixth Amendment …

Case was remanded for a determination of whether the court took into account only conduct directly related to the offense of conviction.

Here the Court held that "unless the use of sophisticated means significantly facilitates the defendant's concealment of his tax evasion from the IRS, it is not relevant conduct …

Here the Court held that a Type C plea agreement "once accepted, binds the district court notwithstanding departures from the applicable guidelines." (Id., at 11340).

In this case, the Eleventh Circuit held the Eleventh Circuit held that an enhancement for the abuse of the position of trust could be justified only if the abuse was connected to the offense of conviction. (Id. at 1455). The court however did not give any explanation for its holding …

This case raises two significant issues - neither of which can really be gleaned from a reading of the bland and dulcet tones of the Court's decision. For that reason, we have posted on the Internet defense counsel's brief which amplifies those two issues - one dealing with a defendant's …

This case raises two significant issues - neither of which can really be gleaned from a reading of the bland and dulcet tones of the Court's decision. For that reason, we have posted on the Internet defense counsel's brief which amplifies those two issues - one dealing with a defendant's …

The petitioner in this case was convicted of a murder that took place more than 20 years ago, in 1977. He was convicted and sentenced to death - and now, after all that time, the Sixth Circuit vacated his conviction on the grounds that he was denied his Sixth Amendment …

This case is noted for its discussion of the "same elements test" and its statement that "the assumption underlying the Blockburger rule is that Congress ordinarily does not intend to punish the same offense under two different statutes".

A few weeks ago, in our issue dated December 29, 1997, we …

At first blush, this decision appears to be nothing more than a routine denial of an en banc rehearing of a previously reported case. In U.S. v. Underwood, 122 F.3d 389 (7th Cir. 1997) a panel of the Seventh Circuit held that the district court (Judge Alesia) had violated the …

This case is noted for its discussion of the "same elements test" and its statement that "the assumption underlying the Blockburger rule is that Congress ordinarily does not intend to punish the same offense under two different statutes".

A few weeks ago, in our issue dated December 29, 1997, we …

The petitioner in this case was convicted of a murder that took place more than 20 years ago, in 1977. He was convicted and sentenced to death - and now, after all that time, the Sixth Circuit vacated his conviction on the grounds that he was denied his Sixth Amendment …

Here the Court held that an indictment which charged possession of a gun by a felon in violation of 18 USC § 922(g)(1) and possession of the same gun by an unlawful user of controlled substances in violation of 18 USC § 922(g)(3) was multiplicious.

A few weeks ago, in …

This case raises two significant issues - neither of which can really be gleaned from a reading of the bland and dulcet tones of the Court's decision. For that reason, we have posted on the Internet defense counsel's brief which amplifies those two issues - one dealing with a defendant's …