Clarifying its earlier decision in U.S. v. Whren, the D.C.Circuit held that on a remand the defendant could raise new issues which were based on facts that were not even existing at the time of the initial sentencing.

In this case the D.C. Circuit joined the Second Circuit (U.S. v. Core, 125 F.3d 74 (2nd Cir. 1997) and the Third Circuit (U.S. v. Sally, 116 F.3d 76 (3rd Cir. 1997) in holding that sentencing courts may consider extraordinary post-conviction rehabilitation as a proper grounds for a sentencing departure ...

Over the strong dissent of Judge Reinhardt, the Court refused to rehear en banc its previous decision that a defendant who commits a crime while under a criminal justice sentence is subject to an enhancement under § 4A1.1(d).

Judge Reinhardt argued that the effect of this decision was to hold ...

Joining decisions from the 3rd, 5th and D.C. Circuits, the Court held that the enhanced penalties of § 860(a) apply to a defendant who possessed drugs in a schoolyard zone, even if he intended to distribute them elsewhere.

The Court cited U.S. v. McDonald, 991 F.2d 866 (D.C.Cir, 1993); U.S. ...

United States v. Santoyo, 146 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Flaum)
United States v. Harpaul, 4 F.Supp.2d 137 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (Judge Spatt)

By now one would think that the Government's frequent pattern of refusing to file its fabled motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, for sentence reductions based on ...

Citing U.S. v. Maxwell, 34 F.3d 1006, 1010-11 (11th Cir, 1994), the Court reasoned that "when illegal conduct does exist in 'discrete, identifiable units' apart from the offense of conviction, the Guidelines anticipate a separate charge for such conduct." (Id., at 852). Here the Courtn held that the crime of ...

This is a rare case in which the court held that a second sentence imposed after a prior remand was vindictive, and affirmed that vindictiveness can play no part in resentencing after a new trial.

Here the defendant was first sentenced to six months in custody with one month to ...

The Court held that "two offenses do not constitute a single course of conduct simply because they both involve a fraud" - and concluded that the two fraudulent schemes here (one to sell bottled water vending machines and the other to sell greenhouse opportuinities) could "readliy be broken into discrete, ...

United States v. Santoyo, 146 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Flaum)
United States v. Harpaul, 4 F.Supp.2d 137 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (Judge Spatt)

By now one would think that the Government's frequent pattern of refusing to file its fabled motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, for sentence reductions based on ...

The defendant in this case pled guilty to theft from an employee benefit plan. Prior to sentencing, the district court (Judge Wexler) had some ex parte conversations with the court-appointed trustee of the benefit plan who allegedly explained that there were 476 victims of the crime. The defendant argued that ...

In this decision, the Court relied upon the Supreme Court's ruling in Ross v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81 (1998). In that case, the Court held that the loss of peremptory challenges is not an infringement of a defendant's constitutional right to an impartial jury. However, the Court left open th ...

When the defendant in this case was sentenced, Judge Wexler ordered him to pay a fine of $60,000, even though he made no inquiry nor any findings as to the defendant's ability to pay a fine and despite a conclusion in the presentence report that the defendant "appears unable to ...

This is one of the first cases we have seen which has raised some serious questions about the "forget the presumption of innocence - just incarcerate them" attitude of much modern day criminal legislation. In this case the defendant was convicted of bank robbery and he was sentenced to life ...

United States v. Lowery, Docket No. 97-368-CR-Zloch (S.D.Fla. 1998) (Judge Zloch)
United States v. Arana, Docket No. 95-CR-80272 (E.D.Mich. 1998) (Judge Rosen)
United States v. Mauney, Docket No. 1:07CR251-1 (M.D.N.C. 1998)

Here they come. These three cases are the first of what we expect will be an onslaught of decisions ...

In this case, the inimitable Judge Lechner (we don't remember ever seeing a single decision of his in favor of a criminal defendant) reaffirmed, on remand, an enhancement for obstruction of justice, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, after the Third Circuit had remanded with instructions to consider the impact of ...

Case is noted for its discussion of the term "ejusdem generis" which the Court said "limits the general term as referring only to items of the same category" and which requires some ambuguity in the statute.

Here a prisoner brought a § 1983 action against prison officials based on continual confinement in a segregated housing unit (SHU) that lasted in excess of four years and occurred in three different prison facilities. The Court analyzed the claim under the Supreme Court's decision in Sandin v. Conner, 515 ...

In this case the Seventh Circuit held that the sentencing court (Judge Holderman) went beyond the parameters of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) by ordering, as a condition of supervised release, that the defendant submit to random drug testing "at the direction and discretion of the probation officer." The Court acknowledged ...

Case held that the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement for possessing a firearm applies unless it is "clearly improbable" that the weapon was connected with the offense.

Sharply disagreeing with the 6th Circuit, the 2nd Circuit holds that a sentencing court does not have the authority to toll a defendant's term of supervised release during the period while he is deported or excluded from the U.S.

Sharply disagreeing with the position taken by the Sixth Circuit in ...

After noting that the law governing prisoners subject to multiple sentences is "hardly a model of clarity", the Court flatly rejected, as incorrect, the BOP's interpretation of § 3584(a) - namely that it was powerless to grant the defendant nunc pro tunc relief by designating the state correctional facility as ...

Court agreed with the holding in U.S. v. Singleton, 144 F.3d 1343 (10th Cir. 1998) that inducements offered to cooperating witnesses violated the Federal anti-bribery statute.

United States v. Lowery, Docket No. 97-368-CR-Zloch (S.D.Fla. 1998) (Judge Zloch)
United States v. Arana, Docket No. 95-CR-80272 (E.D.Mich. 1998) (Judge Rosen)
United States ...

The Court stated that "Multiple acts of obstruction, especially when they differ in kind or have different obstructive objectives, can be found to fall sufficiently far outside the heartland conduct § 3C1.1 was designed to address that departures will be warranted." (Id., at 97). The Court also warned, however, that ...

United States v. Santoyo, 146 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Flaum)
United States v. Harpaul, 4 F.Supp.2d 137 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (Judge Spatt)

By now one would think that the Government's frequent pattern of refusing to file its fabled motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, for sentence reductions based on ...

United States v. Santoyo, 146 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 1998) (Judge Flaum)
United States v. Harpaul, 4 F.Supp.2d 137 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (Judge Spatt)

By now one would think that the Government's frequent pattern of refusing to file its fabled motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, for sentence reductions based on ...

Quote from Judge Kozinski in which he explains how liberty can be lost through insistent nibbles of Government officials.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - "The piranha can be as deadly as the shark."

"Liberty - the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government - is as easily lost through insistent nibbles ...

In this case the Defendants objected to the Probation Officer's conclusion that where the Antitrust Guideline refers to "the volume of commerce done by him or his principal in goods or services that were affected by the violation" (U.S.S.G. § 2R1.1(b)(2)), sentencing pursuant to the Guideline should take into account ...

Court denied motion requesting issuance of letters rogatory on the grounds that the information sought was not relevant to the indictment and would not be issued to test the reliability of foreign records certified as to authenticity.

Court vacated defendant's sentence because district court improperly relied in statements made to the probation officer and included in the presentence report in violation of terms of plea agreement and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8.

Case affirmed that § 1B1.8 "applies to statements made to probation officer which are later incorporated into ...

Here the Court held that the "use" prong of § 924(c) was not satisfied when the evidence merely showed that bombs were stored near drugs in light of evidence that each bomb required a fuse to detonate it.