The question presented here was whether statements by the defendant to which the prosecution has no access are discoverable under Rule 16(a)(1)(A). The Court ruled as follows:

"To answer this the court examines what it means to be "in possession, custody, or control of the government" for purposes of Rule ...

The defendant in this case was found guilty by a jury of bank fraud. At a hearing to resolve various sentencing issues, he requested substitute counsel, criticizing his attorney's decision not to call a witness and faulting her for failure to file motions for judgment of acquittal and for a ...

The Court observed: "The Supreme Court has held that "judicial determinations of probable cause within 48 hours of arrest will, as a general matter, comply with the promptness requirement of Gerstein." County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44, 56, 111 S.Ct. 1661, 114 L.Ed.2d 49 (1991). Nevertheless, the Court ...

Here the Court held that a prosecutor's knowing violation of a specific provision of the U.S. Attorney's Manual which requires disclosure of substantial exculpatory materials to the grand jury does not warrant dismissal of the indictment.

Judge Evans once described the role of the grand jury with these words: "Flowery ...

This high profile case, which charged five police officers with violating the civil rights of Abner Louima, is noted for its discussion of a number of issues including severance requests based on mutually antagonistic defenses.

In denying the various requests for severance, the Court observed: " As Zafiro v. United ...

The proverb that bad cases make bad law probably had a lot to do with the decision in this case. Here, the defendant pled guilty to bank fraud. The case does not reflect what her Guideline sentencing range was; but the Court made note of the fact that her presentence ...

The Court held that when a defendant appeals a sentence based on a retroactive amendment to the Guidelines, the court has the authority to consider a downward departure based on new circumstances, such as extraordinary rehabilitation.

This is an interesting and well-reasoned decision which addresses the power of the court ...

This is an interesting and well-reasoned decision which addresses the power of the court to consider a downward sentencing departure at a resentencing in conjunction with a motion to reduce the defendant's sentence based on a subsequent, retroactive amendment to the Guidelines. The decision, however, is also directly contrary to ...

In its decision, the Court stated: "The Jencks Act requires the government to provide, upon request, any prior statements of government witnesses that relate to the subject matter of the witnesses' testimony. (Id., at 53).

Here the Court affirmed that statements must be produced under the Jencks Act whether they ...

This is an interesting Jencks Act (18 U.S.C. § 3500) decision that contains some surprisingly sweeping statements about the scope of the Act and the remedies that are available when the Government negligently or intentionally violates its responsibilities thereunder. The Jencks Act requires the United States to disclose, immediately after ...

This case is noted for its discussion of whether a sentencing court, in calculating a defendant's sentence in a fraud case under U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1, is limited to "actual" losses occasioned by the defendant where the "intended" losses were greater but some extrinsic factor prevented the defendant from achieving the ...

The defendant in this case pled guilty to one count of mail fraud, arising out of his activities as a purchasing agent for a subsidiary of Kraft Foods through which he funneled business to companies in which family members had an interest, contrary to company policy. The central issue in ...

The proverb that bad cases make bad law probably had a lot to do with the decision in this case. Here, the defendant pled guilty to bank fraud. The case does not reflect what her Guideline sentencing range was; but the Court made note of the fact that her presentence ...

Here the Court vacated the conspiracy convictions of six of the defendants on the grounds that the Government's proof merely showed that they sold crack in the same geographical area - not that they were associated in any way.

The Court summarized its findings as follows: "There is copious evidence ...

In the 6/7/99 issue of P&J, we reported on U.S. v. Lombera-Camorlinga, 170 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir. 1999), where the Ninth Circuit held that, where Customs officials violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by failing to inform the defendant of his right to contact the Mexican Embassy prior to ...

Here the Court denied the mortions for a change in venue, concluding that "the adverse pretrial publicity has not so saturated this district as to amount to presumed prejudice." (Id., at 217). It stated in part: "Under Rule 21(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the court must transfer ...

The question addressed in this case was "whether a grand jury witness may assert a privilege against self- incrimination and thus withhold his testimony from the grand jury concerning his role as a government cooperative in a narcotics investigation." (Id., at 617). In answering that question, another court from the ...

In this case the defendant argued that his speedy trial rights had been violated by a delay of 293 days between the date of his arraignment and the date his trial commenced. He focused principally on two continuances sought by a co-defendant, Nelson, that delayed trial for 77 days. Counsel ...

This is an interesting Jencks Act (18 U.S.C. § 3500) decision that contains some surprisingly sweeping statements about the scope of the Act and the remedies that are available when the Government negligently or intentionally violates its responsibilities thereunder. The Jencks Act requires the United States to disclose, immediately after ...