Here the Court held that the regulation at issue, which resulted in a denial of an inmate's request to receive Playboy Magazine, was facially overbroad and could not be rendered valid by a limiting instruction. This decision was subsequently reversed by an en banc decision reported at 188 F.3d 1054. ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - The changing standards for determining whether a confession is free and voluntary.

"[A] confession, in order to be admissible, must be free and voluntary: that is, must not be extracted by any sort of threats of violence, nor obtained by any direct or implied promises, ...

Here, the district court held that § 3585(b)(1), which provides that a defendant "shall be given credit toward the service of a term of imprisonment for any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the sentence commences - (1) as a result of the offense for ...

In his ruling, Judge Breyer emphasized that he was not ruling on the legality of the possession of marijuana by patients whose doctors recommended its use, only the distribution of such drugs by the operators of so-called "medical cannabis dispensaries".

The court did comment on the common law defense of ...

Reversing existing precedent, the en banc court held that an indictment of a practitioner for unlawfully dispensing controlled substances need not aver that it was done outside the course of professional practice.

Case held that the timing of arrests in two prior controlled substance convictions resulted in an artificial increase in the defendant's offense level and criminal history category, justifying a four-level downward departure.

Here the Court affirmed as reasonable a 215 day delay in bringing the defendant's to trial while the Government sought to apprehend and prosecute a co-defendant, under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7). However, in its decision the Fifth Circuit expressly rejected the approach taken by the Second and ...

The sole issue presented in this case was whether a defendant's sworn affidavit stating that he was not given any Miranda warnings and that he never waived his right to counsel was sufficiently factual and specific to entitle him to an evidentiary hearing on his motion to suppress some post-arrest ...

Case held that an Allen charge which created a duty to persuade other jurors and did not contain cautionary language was coercice and deprived petitioner of a fair trial.

Despite agreeing that the definition of "financial institutions" in Application Note 14 to § 2F1.1 does not include pension funds, the Court held that a pension fund was a "financial institution", thus requiring an additional sentencing enhancement.

The decision in this case was at odds with an earlier panel's decision in U.S. v. Rios-Favela, 118 F.3d 653 (9th Cir. 1997). In that case, the panel had ruled that "the Sentencing Commission "adequately considered the nature of the offenses it defined as an aggravated felony and thus . ...

Case held that for uncontroverted matters set forth in the Presentence Report, the district court need not make any independent findings of fact and may rely on the conclusions and findings in that Report regarding the quantity of drugs.

The Court also emphasized that a sentencing court is not bound ...

Here the Tenth Circuit held that the Parole Commission lacked the authority to impose a new term of special parole after the petitioner's original term of special parole had been revoked.

Here the Court held that the FDCPA did not preempt the Government's ability to collect restitution; and that the Government was not required to first obtain a civil judgment.

This case is noted because of its detailed discussion of the scope of the Government's broad powers to enforce the collection ...

Case held that the district court's failure to inform the defendant of the elements of the charges against her and the possible penalties during the plea colloquy rendered the plea involuntary, and the error was not harmless.

In sharp contrast to the Tenth Circuit's ruling in the U.S. v. Erving ...

Joining six other Circuits, the Court held that the "indicment or waiver" phrase contained in 21 USC § 851(a)(2) refers to the federal offense for which the mandatory sentence is imposed.

Court concluded that the defendant would have testified at his first trial even if withheld Brady material had been produced, so the testimony at the first trial was not tainted by a Brady violation so as to be suppressed at subsequent retrials.

This is another case involving the Government's misuse of its power under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1; and it shows the growing concern of the courts that the Government frequently seeks to use that provision to control the length of sentences. Here, the defendant signed a plea agreement in which he agreed ...

Court reversed district court''s dismissal of a § 2255 motion as untimely where petition was filed within one year of the enactment of the AEDPA, but more than five years after the conviction became final.

Case held that circumstantial evidence did not, as a matter of law, support finding that defendant knowlingly possessed illegal drugs found in secret compartment of borrowed truck beyond a reasonable doubt.

Here the Court emphasized that there are three elements of possession with intent to distribute illegal drugs: (1) knowing ...

Case held that the district court's failure to inform the defendant of the elements of the charges against her and the possible penalties during the plea colloquy rendered the plea involuntary, and the error was not harmless.

In sharp contrast to the Tenth Circuit's ruling in the U.S. v. Erving ...

This is a rare case in which the Court approved an award of $45,000 in compensatory damages against the Bureau of Prisons for failing to provide adequate care to the petitioner within the meaning of 18 USC § 4042.

Over the dissent of Judge McKay, the Court held that the replacement of one juror after the jury was empaneled and sworn did not violate the defendant's double jeopardy rights.

This is another case involving the Government's misuse of its power under U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1; and it shows the growing concern of the courts that the Government frequently seeks to use that provision to control the length of sentences. Here, the defendant signed a plea agreement in which he agreed ...

Court held that the Government's interest in property it seized was superior to the interests asserted by creditors, because it was derived from proceeds of illegal drug activity.

Here, citing the provisions of 21 U.S.C. § 853(c) ("All right, title, and interest in property described in subsection (a) of this ...

Although the Court held that the imposition of an obligation to reimburse the Government for legal fees under § 3006A(f) was an "independent civil liability", it ruled that the defendant could be ordered to reimburse such funds.

This case explores the interplay between Rule 11(e) and 32(e) of the pre-2002 version of the Fed.R.Crim.P. and also discusses the Circuit split on the issue of whether formal acceptance of a plea agreement is necessary before a defendant loses the right to withdraw his plea for any reason whatsoever ...

Case held that the one-year limitations period in the AEDPA did not bar a habeas corpus petition filed within one year if the effective date of the AEDPA even though the petition was filed more than 10 years after the conviction became final.

Here the Third Circuit rejected the Seventh Circuit's rule that a drug courier is not entitled to a minor role adjustment because "when a drug courier is held accountable only for the amount he carries, he plays a significant role in that offense.

In rejecting the Seventh Circuit's ruling in ...

In this case the Eleventh Circuit joined a majority of Circuits in holding that the district court had the authority, following a successful Bailey appeal to resentence the defendant on the remaining unchallenged convictions.

This case deals with the issue of whether, as written, U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1(b)(6)(A) and (B) [now § 2F1.1(b)(7)(A0 and (B)] and Application Note 14 [now Application Note 16] apply to losses incurred by pension funds - as opposed to other types of "financial institutions." That provision was adopted by the ...

In this case the Eleventh Circuit joined a majority of Circuits in holding that the district court had the authority, following a successful Bailey appeal to resentence the defendant on the remaining unchallenged convictions.

Case held that, in assessing the vailidity of a Miranda waiver by a 16-year old mentally retarded suspect, the proper question was whether the police reasonably believed that the suspect understood their explanation of those rights.

This case also deals with the impact of the Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. ...

This revealing decision is one of a number of recent rulings that have emphasized the growing evolutionary changes in the judicial view of the concept of "voluntariness" in confessions. Historically, the courts had always insisted that, for a confession to be admissible in a criminal proceeding, it must be "voluntary." ...