Here, over the dissent of Judge Richard S. Arnold, the Court held that Apprendi presents a "new rule of constitutional law" that is not a "watershed" decision and thus petitioners may not raise Apprendi claims retroactively on collateral review.

In this case, the majority held (over the dissent of Judge ...

Here a divided panel from the Ninth Circuit held that 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) and (B), two of the main provisions of the most commonly used drug statute, are facially unconstitutional under Apprendi - a decision with potential far-reaching impact.

Out of the 300-odd lower court Apprendi decisions that have ...

Here the court held that a conviction for assaulting a Federal officer under the enhancement provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 111(b) requires proof of a bodily injury or a use of a dangerous weapon as elements of the offense and not merely as sentencing factors.

This is one of those ...

In this case, the en banc court overruled its prior precedent in U.S. v. Alerta, 96 F.3d 1230 (9th Cir. 1996), and held that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment permits a defendant to be convicted of both conspiracy to violate the drug laws, under 18 U.S.C. § ...

Here Judge Gertner granted a defendant a four-level downward departure based on significantly reduced mental capacity; and in the process she presented an informative guide to departures under U.S.S.G. §$ 5H1.3 and 5K2.13.

In this Sentencing Memorandum, Judge Gertner has presented an excellent hornbook summary and analysis of sentencing departures ...

Here the Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Richardson v. U.S., 526 U.S. 813 (1999), announced a new substantive rule of law that applied retroactively, and that any Richardson errors are subject to harmless error analysis.

As any student of habeas appeals has come to learn, a growing ...

Ah, the sweet smell of justice in Texas! In this case, a divided en banc court reversed a highly criticized ruling by a three-judge panel last year which reversed a district court’s order which granted a Texas death row inmate a new trial because his counsel had slept through parts ...

In an action alleging the employment of illegal aliens, defendants moved to dismiss the indictment based on a denial of their Sixth Amendment, U.S. Const. amend. VI, rights to confrontation.

Following raids on three restaurants, defendants were charged in a 71-count indictment. The plaintiff was ordered to release material witnesses ...

The defendant in this case, a 26-year old resident alien, came to the U.S. from Peru at the age of 13. He pled guilty to one count of traveling in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in sexual acts with a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). ...