Back in 1946, the Supreme Court held in Pinkerton v. U.S., 328 U.S. 640, 647-48 (1946), that a co-conspirator may be vicariously liable for a substantive offense committed by another co-conspirator if the act was done “in furtherance of the conspiracy” and was “reasonably foreseen as a necessary or natural ...

In this case, the Fourth Circuit extended previous ruling on the Singleton issue, holding that the Government may pay money, in addition to offering leniency, in exchange for testimony without violating the provisions of the Anti-Gratuity Statute.

In U.S. v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192 (4th Cir. 1999), the Fourth emphatically ...

Here the Court held that a plea agreement entered after the district court improperly denied the defendant the right to represent himself at trial was not voluntarily entered into and had to be vacated.

In this case, the district court denued the defendant's request to represent himself at trial because ...

In affirming the district court's sealing of an indictment to protect a key Government witness, the Court stated that Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)(4) "rests on the premise that criminal defendants not yet in custody may elude arrest upon learning of their indictment. Once the court sealed the fourth superseding indictment in this ...

Here the Fourth Circuit held that where a handgun had at least the "potential" of attracting the defendant into making a sale of drugs, a jury could properly conclude that the drug transaction was facilitated by the presence of a firearm.

In this case the district court reversed the district ...

On a motion for reconsideration, the Ninth Circuit somewhat modified its earler decision reported at 192 F.3d 888, this time stating: "In the present case, we need hold only that the Double Jeopardy Clause was not violated because it is clear from the facts underlying the present appeal that the ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - Federal prosecutors and the need for accountability.

“If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his case, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather ...

This case, dealing with a challenge to an Armed Career Criminal Act conviction under 18 USC § 924(e)(1), is noted principally for its detailed discussion of the Supreme Court's holding in Custis v. U.S., 511 U.S. 485 (1994).

In its detailed review of the "confusing" decision of the Supreme Court ...

Here the Court held that the definition of "common scheme or plan" as used in the relevant conduct provisions of the Guidelines does not apply to the career offender provisions of § 4B1.1, despite the absence of a definition in that section.

Under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 the courts are authorized ...

United States v. Santana, 83 F.Supp.2d 224 (D.Puerto Rico 1999) (Judge Fusté)
United States v. Peralta-Ramirez, 83 F.Supp.2d 263 (D.Puerto Rico 2000) (Judge Cerezo)

Both of these cases deal with an issue that has been “haunting the halls of the Puerto Rico Federal Court” (see, U.S. v. Sotomayor Vasquez, 69 ...

Here the Seventh Circuit issued formal notice of disciplinary proceedings under Fed.R.App.P. 46(c) against an Assistant U.S. Attorney who deliberately misled the court causing a habeas motion to be rendered moot in an extradition case.

In 1997, a Norwegian court convicted Lars Erik Lindstrom of fraud and sentenced him to ...

In rejecting claims that the district court had denied the defendant a fair trial by frequently questioning a Government witness, creating an aura of partiality towards the Government, the Fifth Circuit stated: "The district court's questions did not deny Cisneros a fair trial. A trial court has the discretion to ...

After noting a statutory ambiguity in, and a Circuit split on the interpretation of, the Federal murder-for-hire statute (18 USC § 1958), the Fifth Circuit held that the Government had sufficiently established the interstate commerce connection.

In analyzing the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1958, the Court noted that "Section ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - Federal prosecutors and the need for accountability.

“If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his case, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather ...

In this case, the district court denied the defendant's request to represent himself at trial because he decided that the defendant did not know enough about the legal issues in the case. After his request was denied, the defendant decided to plead guilty rather than go to trial with his ...

In 1996, the defendant in this case, while on parole from a 1981 District of Columbia conviction, was arrested and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Three times he was tried for that crime. The first trial ended in a mistrial, with a hung jury, 10 ...

Court held that an expert witness presented by the government at trial can testify about characteristics of a particular type of fraudulent scheme but will not be allowed to testify whether the defendant's scheme has these characteristics.

In this case, the Southern District of New York held that an expert ...

United States v. Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2000) (Judge Jones)
United States v. Takahashi, No. 98-10219 (9th Cir. 3/6/00) (Judge Van Graafeiland)

In both of these cases the Ninth Circuit allowed the Government to use expert testimony to suggest that defense witnesses who are members of the gang ...

Second Circuit hed that the defendants' Sixth Amendment right to counsel was not violated when a court order prevented their attorneys from telling them that they were being investigated for alleged jury and witness tampering during an ongoing trial.

In the instant case, the United States Court of Appeals for ...

United States v. Santana, 83 F.Supp.2d 224 (D.Puerto Rico 1999) (Judge Fusté)
United States v. Peralta-Ramirez, 83 F.Supp.2d 263 (D.Puerto Rico 2000) (Judge Cerezo)

Both of these cases deal with an issue that has been “haunting the halls of the Puerto Rico Federal Court” (see, U.S. v. Sotomayor Vasquez, 69 ...

United States v. Hankey, 203 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2000) (Judge Jones)
United States v. Takahashi, 205 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2000) (Judge Van Graafeiland)

In both of these cases the Ninth Circuit allowed the Government to use expert testimony to suggest that defense witnesses who are members of the ...