This is a significant decision dealing with the constitutionality of one of Congress’s pet rocks - the “three strikes” statutes. The defendant in this case challenged his life sentence on the grounds that a provision of the “three strikes” statute under which it was imposed was unconstitutional because that section, ...

Citing Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 91996), the court held that inmates alleging a systemic violation of their right of access to the courts must show a "widespread actual injury".

Here the appellants argued that the BOP violated their statutory and constitutional rights when it denied their requests for a sentence reduction under 18 USC § 3621(e)(2)(B) on the basis of INS detainers against them. The Court held that the BOP acted within its statutory authority in promulgating 28 CFR ...

Over the dissent of Judge Coffman, the Court rejected the defendant's claim that two prior crack transactions shoiuld not have been included as relevant conduct in determining his sentence for selling .14 grams of crack to an undercover agent.

Here the Court affirmed the district court's finding that the defendant ...

In this "old law" case, the Court granted the defendant a 10-year reduction in his sentence based in part on the isolated nature of his confinement and in part on the "considerable" disparity of the sentences imposed on co-defendants.

This is an interesting "old law" case involving the 40 year ...

Here the Court rejected the petitioner's contention that a state court's determination that his state sentence was to be concurrent with his prior federal sentence was binding on the BOP or entitled him to any credit against his federal sentence.

The Court framed the issue in this case as follows: ...

This case explains an important twist to the provisions of U.S.S.G. § 2X1.1 - which normally allows a three- level reduction in a sentence where the defendant was convicted of an "attempt" to commit a crime. Here, the defendant pled guilty to attempting to possess, with intent to distribute, six ...

In this case the defendant claimed that the district court erred by failing to apply the 1993 amendment to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 - Amendment 500 - to determine whether his sentence should be enhanced under that provision. He argued that in finding that his conduct warranted an enhancement pursuant to ...

This is an interesting "old law" case involving the 40 year sentence imposed on General Manuel Noriega for his conviction in 1992 of various offenses, principally drug offenses and a RICO charge. The General, of course, was captured in 1989 during the American invasion of Panama and convicted of violating ...

Here the Court held that Guideline Amendment 552, which deleted the term "express" from the phrase dealing with robberies that involved an "express threat of death", could not be applied retroactively in those Circuits that followed the minority view.

A majority of the Court held that a 1997 amendment to ...

Here, disagreeing with the Eighth Circuit, the Court held that Guideline Amendment 521, which removed the targeting language from § 3A1.1, was a clarification of the Guidelines, not a substantive amendment.

"Brawner contends that the sentencing court clearly erred by imposing a two-level increase pursuant to section 3A1.1(b) of the ...

United States v. Sanchez, 176 F.3d 1214 (9th Cir. 1999) (Judge Alarcon)
United States v. Marshall, 173 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 1999) (Judge Tjoflat)

These two cases present a rare doubleheader: In both cases convictions for drug related crimes were reversed because of multiple examples of prosecutorial misconduct during trial. ...

In one of the better analyses of the Singleton case, Judge Gertner held that while 18 USC § 201(c)(2) may not apply to cutsomary and entrenched practices such as offering leniency to a witness for his testimony, it does apply to cash payments.

In the summer of 1998, a panel ...

In this case the defendant, a lawyer, was convicted of mail fraud for embezzling funds from a law firm of which he was a partner. He argued, inter alia, for a downward departure based on diminished capacity, under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.13. The court denied a departure on those grounds, stating ...

Holding that Eighth Amendment protections, at least in the area of capital punishment, cannot be waived, the court held that the Arizona method of usinf lethal gas to execute inmates is unconstitutional.

Here the Court reversed a conviction because it found that the prosecutor had committed at least six different types of prosecutorial misconduct "in an effort to destroy the defendant's credibility and in his argument to the jury".

United States v. Sanchez, 176 F.3d 1214 (9th Cir. 1999) (Judge Alarcon)
United ...

Here the Court modified its earlier opinion reported at 161 F.3d 397 by holding that the issue of the applicability of Guideline Amendment to petitioner's sentence was not properly before the court since he had failed to raise it on direct appeal.

In this case the defendant claimed that the ...

In 1969 the Supreme Court held that Constitutional due process "requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial." North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 725 (1969). Thus the Supreme Court held ...

In this case, the Court held that where the violation of the Fourth Amendment in a particular case causes no discernable harm to the interests of an individual protected by the particular constitutional prohibition at issue, the exclusion of evidence for the trial is a disproportionately severe and inappropriate sanction. ...

Here the Court firmly held that the Guidelines were not intended to eliminate all differences in the sentencing of accomplices so that two accomplices would receive the same sentence; the intent was to eliminate "irrational" sentencing discrepancies.

The Court stated: "When two accomplices receive different sentences each of which is ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - Another vote against the Federalization of Criminal Law.

"The Court's opinion, which I reluctantly join, obscures what I consider the most troubling aspect of this case: this state-initiated prosecution has been brought in a federal court because it could not lawfully be brought in a ...

We sense that the Second Circuit may still be trying to make amends for its last major controversial decision on the subject of public trials and courtroom closures. In Ayala v. Speckard, 131 F.3d 62 (2d Cir. 1997) (see P&J, 1/19/98), an en banc court reviewed three consolidated appeals in ...

In this case the petitioner, a convicted felon, sought advice from the ATF as to whether the possession of certain types of cartridges consutituted "ammunition" for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). When the ATF refused to respond in detail, the petitioner sought a declaratory judgment. The Court held that ...

After agreeing that the Government's forfeiture was void for lack of adequate notice, the Court held that the district court must grant the claimant's Rule 41(e) motion without a hearing on the merits since the statute of limitations had passed.

Here, the defendant/claimant brought a Rule 41(e) motion for the ...

Case held that BOP rule excluding prisoners with detainers from sentence reduction eligibility under substance abuse statute was valid exercise of BOP's authority and did not deprive prisoners subject to INS detainers of due process.

Here the appellants argued that the BOP violated their statutory and constitutional rights when it ...