Rarely does a case express as clearly as this one does the enormous advantages that accrue to the Government through the use of relevant conduct at sentencing. In this case, the defendant was charged with two counts of manufacturing methamphetamine at his home, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) ...

In this case the defendant signed a plea agreement in which he specifically undertook "to pay any restitution ordered by the District Court." He was then ordered to pay $138,941.40 in restitution, he he attempted to appeal that order on unspecified grounds. The Eighth Circuit refused to hear his appeal, ...

In this case, with unusually caustic words, the Sixth Circuit addressed a series of extraordinary and incredibly inappropriate comments by a State prosecutor throughout a trial, holding that they were so flagrant and so improper that they warranted habeas relief. The defendant, Dr. Boyle, was a successful ophthalmologist. After declining ...

In the instant case, the Fifth Circuit concluded that the discovery requirement recognized in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), does not apply when the accused does not go to trial. The court further established that a rule holding that a prosecutor’s failure to disclose material exculpatory information to ...

Here the Sixth Circuit affirmed that a knock-and-announce search which in executed in a manner that does not give the occupants a reasonable opportunity to answer is invalid and warrants the suppression of all evidence seized.

This is a significant Fourth Amendment case that discusses two important derivatives of the ...

Here the Court held that the trial court's failure to instruct the jury that it must unanimously agree about which violatiuons were a continuing series of predicate violations for CCE purposes was harmless error due to substantial evidence presented.

One of the issue raised in this case was whether the ...

This case speaks loudly about America’s concepts of the “evolving standards of decency” - an oft-quoted judicial platitude used to justify many puritanical decisions. The defendant in this case was convicted in an Oklahoma state court of forcible sodomy, second degree rape, first degree burglary (he stole seven dollars from ...

Court held that an enhancement for physical restraint under USSG § 3A1.3 was improper where the defendant ordered the victim to leave her bedroom and walk downstairs at gunpoint, since there was no physical contact.

In this case, the defendant forced his way into his estranged wife's house, pointed a ...

Here, in a case of first impression, the Court held that a defendant's conviction under the schoolyard statute (21 USC § 860) rendered him ineligible to receive a sentencing adjustment under the safety-valve provisions of the Guidelines.

The defendant in this case was convicted of selling drugs within 1000 feet ...

Once again, the Government has extended its jurisdictional might over citizens of other nations. In this case, which has far reaching implications, District Judge Sand of New York found that Congress intended its anti-terrorism statutes to apply to foreign nationals who commit acts of terrorism on foreign soil. At issue ...

Here the Court held that a claimant had no Sixth Amendment right to counsel to challenge a civil forfeiture, and thus had no entitlement to the appointment of CJA counsel for such proceedings.

This is a significant Fourth Amendment case that discusses two important derivatives of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibitions against unreasonable searches - namely, the knock and announce rule and the “independent source doctrine.”

In this case, a confidential informant told the local police that the defendant was using an abnormal amount ...

Here the Court denied the Government's motion, under 28 USC § 2044, to apply $5,000 in bail money (that had been posted by the defendant's counsel) to a criminal restitution order, holding that § 2044 does not apply to third party funds.

When the defendant in this case was indicted, ...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK - One of the most graphic descriptions of the effects of "relevant conduct" on the sentencing process was made by Chief Judge Merritt of the Sixth Circuit, who wrote:

"In these three cases [being considered in a consolidated appeal], we see the 'relevant conduct' system run ...