In an earlier decision of this case (see P&J, 6/28/99), the Seventh Circuit held that the trial court’s decision to deny a continuance and refusal to ask at voir dire four out of five probing questions about potential juror’s bias relating to gangs warranted granting a writ of habeas corpus ...

The defendant in this case was convicted of making false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 - and, at sentencing, the district court included in its sentencing calculation as relevant conduct certain "losses" that the defendant's workers suffered due to his failure to pay them overtime wages in ...

Here the Court denied a motion for a new trial, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 33, based on newly discovered evidence that a police witness, Detective Johnny St. Valentine Brown, who testified as an expert, had falsified his education and credentials. The Court stated that, while the Detective's perjury was a serious ...

Here the Third Circuit added to one of the many Circuit splits over the interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 666. The principal issue was whether § 666 requires some connection between the defendant’s conduct and the Federal program or Federal funds.

Previously, the Second Circuit held, in U.S. v. Santopietro, ...

In 1997, the Second Circuit held that a prosecutor may not, as part of her summation, use the mere fact of a defendant’s presence at his trial as the basis for impugning his credibility. In that case, Agard v. Portuondo, 117 F.3d 696 (2nd Cir. 1997) (see P&J, 8/18/97), a ...

Here the Court affirmed the denial of a minimal role-in-the-offense sentence adjustment to three seamen who were transporting cocaine since they were not convicted of conspiracy, but possession, which made their knowledge of the conspiracy irrelevant.

Following an earlier remand, in which the district court made appropriate findings that the ...

Here, relying in its decision in U.S. v. Marmolejo, 139 F.3d 528, the Fifth Circuit once again affirmed the minority view that on a restencing a defendant is limited to raising only those discrete, particular issues identified by the appeals court.

The defendant in this case was convicted of manufacturing ...

United States v. Olaniyi-Oke, 199 F.3d 767 (5th Cir. 1999) (Judge Smith)
United States v. Hartsel, 199 F.3d 812 (6th Cir. 1999) (Judge McKinley)

Both of these cases are unusual in that the court found for the defendants on the ground that the conviction obtained was actually not a crime ...

Here the Court granted a downward departure to a defendant who was prosecuted in a district where the policy of the U.S. Attorney was not to grant cooperating defendants any use immunity under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8.

United States v. Ringis, 78 F.Supp.2d 905 (N.D.Iowa 1999)
United States v. Clark, 79 ...

United States v. Olaniyi-Oke, 199 F.3d 767 (5th Cir. 1999) (Judge Smith)
United States v. Hartsel, 199 F.3d 812 (6th Cir. 1999) (Judge McKinley)

Both of these cases are unusual in that the court found for the defendants on the ground that the conviction obtained was actually not a crime ...

Here the Court held that the mere fact that the trial court grants the defendant's motion for acquittal on some of the counts, but not on all, does not prove that the charges were frivolous or prosecuted in bad faith for purposes of the Hyde Amend.

This case is noted for its discussion of the evidentiary value of “jury views” - the technique of allowing the jury to visit the scene of a crime. In this case, a bank in New Hampshire was robbed by a lone robber who was wearing mirrored sunglasses and a blue ...

In an earlier decision of this case (see P&J, 6/28/99), the Seventh Circuit held that the trial court’s decision to deny a continuance and refusal to ask at voir dire four out of five probing questions about potential juror’s bias relating to gangs warranted granting a writ of habeas corpus ...

The defendant in this case was convicted of three counts of knowingly filing a false tax return, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1), arising out of her embezzlement of funds from her employer and her failure to report those funds on her tax returns. At sentencing the district court ...

United States v. Ringis, 78 F.Supp.2d 905 (N.D.Iowa 1999)
United States v. Clark, 79 F.Supp.2d 1066 (D.D.Iowa 1999)

These two decisions, written by Judge Bennett (who is probably the country’s most prolific decision-writer), addressed the issue of whether disparities among the sentencing policies and practices of the various U.S. Attorney’s ...

Here the Court held that the exclusion from a trial of a spectator who had been excused from the jury panel violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial.