Here the Court denied the defense of qualified immunity to prison officials and awarded $5,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages to a prison visitor who was denied access to a toilet and who was forced to urinate in his pants.

This case falls on the lighter side ...

This high profile decision marks the second time that the Supreme Court has vacated the death sentence of Johnny Paul Penry. In 1979, Penry committed a brutal murder in Texas. He was tried, convicted and sentenced to death despite the fact that he was deemed to be mentally retarded. (Over ...

In this case, based on the district court's finding that the defendant was reasonably responsible for 180.4 kilograms of cocaine and a minimum of 50,000 tablets of preludes as part if his role in the drug conspiracy, he was sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment. On appeal, relying on U.S. ...

In reversing the life sentence that had been imposed on defendant Bertha Weekly, the Court stated: "The District Court sentenced Bertha to life in prison based on the amount of crack cocaine the judge found, by a preponderance of the evidence, she possessed with intent to distribute. Because the amount ...

On the day of his trial for charges stemming from a bank robbery, the defendant in this case entered a guilty plea to the entire indictment. The district court (Judge Lozano), obviously displeased that the defendant had waited so long to plead guilty (and perhaps wishing to send a message ...

This is one of those snippets of justice that raises eye-brows about the treatment we accord to aliens - while we are quick to tell other nations to treat their immigrants more fairly. In 1989, the petitioner came to the United States to join the crew of a fishing vessel ...

This case is noted for Judge Marshall's detailed discussion of the meaning of "prevailing party" under the Hyde Amendmednt and her review of the proof required to support an award of counsel fees under that statute.

This is another of a number of recent cases that have considered whether significant sentencing disparities resulting from different sentencing practices and charging decisions of the U.S. Attorneys Offices can constitute a valid grounds for a sentencing departure. Recently, a number of courts have held that a district court has ...

While many courts continue to conclude that almost any sentencing disparity between co-defendants is never a valid ground for a sentencing departure, the Ninth Circuit continues to hold that a district court does have the inherent authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b) to depart downward based on a sentencing disparity ...

The two defendants in this case, Ronald McClain and Desmond Tucker, pled guilty to various counts of conspiracy to commit bank fraud stemming from their use of young women to cash more than $80,000 in counterfeit checks at local banks in Georgia. One of the girls (Jane Doe) recruited by ...

In this case the defendant objected to the imposition of his 151 month sentence for drug dealing on the grounds that it violated the rule established by the Supreme Court in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2001). Since he did not raise that issue in the district court, ...

In this case, the Second Circuit reversed the decision of District Judge John Martin of the S.D.N.Y. to impose a ten year upward departure in the sentence of a defendant convicted of various fraud counts because his wife refused to surrender various assets that Judge Martin believed were proceeds of ...

Here the Court held that a sentence enhancement for obstruction of justice imposed by the district court based on its findings by a preponderance of the evidence did not violate Apprendi since the enhanced sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum.

In denying the defendant's request for a downward departure based on U.S.S.G. § 5K2.16, he Court noted that to grant a departure under that section, "a court must find 1) that the defendant voluntarily disclosed the existence of and accepted responsibility for the offense prior to its discovery; and 2) ...

On remand from the Supreme Court in light of Apprendi, the Eleventh Circuit declined to vacate the sentence that had been imposed on the grounds that there was no plain error since the only evidence regarding the quantity of drugs was uncontested.