QUOTE OF THE WEEK - In a decision in which he sternly rebuked the Government's misuse of a Type C plea agreement for "grotesquely understat[ing] the defendant's relevant conduct, Judge Downes made the following telling comments about the "unfettered discretion" given to prosecutors which "may have a profound and pernicious ...

Here, distinguishing the Ninth's Circuit's holding in U.S. v. Lombera-Camorlinga, 170 F.3d 1241, the Court held that a violation of the Vienna Convention did not require suppression of statements if the defendant does not show prejudice.

The Court stated: "The Ninth Circuit has recently determined that Article 36 creates individual ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - In a decision in which he sternly rebuked the Government's misuse of a Type C plea agreement for "grotesquely understat[ing] the defendant's relevant conduct, Judge Downes made the following telling comments about the "unfettered discretion" given to prosecutors which "may have a profound and pernicious ...

In this case, Judge Gertner held that even limited appeal waiver provisions are against public policy and unenforceable; and she methodically rejected each of the five main arguments normally used to justify appeal waiver provisions.

This powerful decision is another tour de force by one of America's most forthright judges, ...

Here the Court affirmed the use of hearsay evidence under the "present sense impression" exception contained in Rule 803(1) since it was contemporaneously made with little chance for reflection.

One of the many issues addressed in this appeal was whether the Border Patrol had sufficient grounds to conclude that it had reasonable suspicion to justify the stopping, the subsequent search, and the ultimate arrest of three Hispanic defendants on a highway in a remote part of the desert some ...

In this case, the Court emphasized certain minimum due process requirements exist for the revocation of parole and probation; and that, at a minimum, before allowing the use of hearsay evidence, the court must conduct a balancing test of weighing "the releasee's interest in his constitutionally guaranteed right to confrontation ...

Here the Court held that a plea agreement is not completely like a civil contract, even though contract law is useful in its interpretation, and that a district court must look to the statute and the Guidelines, and is thus limited in its review.

The Court held that a plea ...

The defendant was convicted in Federal court of arson under 18 U.S.C. § 844(i), after throwing a Mototov cocktail into the home of his cousin, causing severe damage. On appeal he challenged his conviction on the grounds that the statute exceeded Congress' power under the Commerce Clause (Art. 1, § ...

The Court observed that "[t]he registration of automobiles is a bureaucratic, non adversarial activity undertaken by government employees with no stake in the outcome of criminal proceedings such as this. Accordingly, the vehicle registration was properly admitted under the public records exception." (Id., at 1124).

Here the Court approved the ...

The Court observed: "There is only one bite at the post-conviction apple unless a second or successive petition can show one of two things: a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable, or newly discovered evidence sufficient ...

In this case Judge Downes rejected a "Type C" plea agreement on the grounds that the recommended sentence was "patently unacceptable and impinges on the very concept of justice." (Id., at 1098). We submit that this case shows one reason why the use of Type C plea agreements is so ...

Here the Court held that because the district court sat on a motion for a new trial for a day too long, it lacked jurisdiction to grant a new trial - despite the fact that it ultimately held that the defendant's conviction was seriously suspect.

This is one of those ...

Here the Court focused on the "savings clause" language of § 2255 which reads:

An application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a prisoner who is authorized to apply for relief by motion pursuant to this section, shall not be entertained if it appears that the applicant ...

This is another one of those Internet-pornography cases that seem to be gradually replacing drug crimes as America's greatest menace. In this case, the defendant posted a notice on an Internet bulletin board that he wanted to trade homemade "pornos" with others. In the race to prosecute him, a customs ...

The Court stated: "The Seventh Circuit has combined the requirements of Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 to create a four-prong test that governs the admission of prior bad acts evidence. See United States v. Smith, 103 F.3d 600, 603 (7th Cir. 1996). The admissibility of evidence under Rule 404(b) is ...

The defendant argued that the Supreme Court's decision in Jones v. U.S., 119 S.Ct. 1215 (1999) required the Government to prove the elements of § 521 by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That statue permits a sentence enhancement due to a defendant's involvement with and promotion of criminal street gangs. ...

Quoting from U.S. v. Sanders, 994 F.2d 200, 206-07 (5th Cir. 1993), the court stated: "In Sanders, this court observed that "using some force on a suspect, pointing a weapon at a suspect, ordering a suspect to lie
on the ground, and handcuffing a suspect -- whether singly or in ...

In this case, five days before the final date for filing of such motions, defense counsel attempted to file a petitioner's motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 by mailing it to the court using ordinary mail. When it arrived late, the Government moved to dismiss ...

On remand from the Supreme Court, the Fourth Circuit reluctantly concluded that the application of the ADA and the rehabilitation Act to state prisons was a proper constitutional exercise of Congress' enforcement powers under the 14th Amendment.

The court expressed "reservations" about the "far-reaching and serious implications for the management ...

Citing U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 448-49 (1965), the Court acknowledged that "legislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial are bills ...