Here the Court held that a lengthy pre-trial detention of an accused international terrorist was "extraordinary and justified" because of the gravity of the charges, the complexity of the case and the lack of the Government's responsibility for the delay.

The defendant in this case was a 39-year old United ...

Here the Court held that the "fair and just reason" standard, rather than the "manifest injustice" standard, applied to defendant who sought to withdraw his guilty plea based on newly-discovered evidence after co-defendant was sentenced.

This is one of the rare cases in which a district court granted habeas relief pursuant to a motion under 28 USC § 2255 based on the Apprendi rule - in a decision in which the court implicitly assumed that Apprendi was retroactive.

Here Judge Dorsey granted relief to a ...

Here the 9th Circuit held that a district court may not order a defendant to cash out his undistributed ERISA pension plan funds in order to make immediate payment of restitution obligations, unless his crime involved the ERISA plan in question.

The advent of the mandatory restitution statutes, coupled with ...

This high profile case involving allegations of excessive force used by the Los Angeles Police Department is noted for its review of the current law on the issue of qualified immunity in civil rights actions for damages.

The defendant in this case, Alphonso Shepard, pled guilty to violating 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)((1) by knowingly possessing an unspecified amount of crack cocaine with intent to distribute. The presentence report prepared by the Probation Department concluded that Shepard should be held responsible for at least 50 grams of cocaine ...

In 1996, following a jury trial, the defendant in this case, Michael Angelo Flowal, was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for possession with intent to distribute 5.2 kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Although the drug quantity was never submitted t the ...

Here, where the defendant failed to object to the district court's determination of the drug quantity at sentencing, the Tenth Circuit held that the defendant was not entitled to any Apprendi relief because he could not show "plain" error.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that, despite all of the uproar ...