In this case, the habeas petitioner argued that he was entitled to a presumption of ineffective assistance of counsel where the record indicated that his trial counsel had consulted with him for a mere six minutes prior to the start of trial. The Court found that the defendant's lawyer had ...

Federal Rule of Evidence 806 provides that if the credibility of the declarant is attacked, it may be supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if he testified as a witness. Citing that rule, the district court refused to admit certain statements of one of the ...

This is an important decision on the validity of the highly-popular waivers of appellate rights that are now inserted in most plea agreements. Defense counsel have frequently criticized such waivers on the grounds that, at the time a defendant signs a plea agreement, it really is impossible for him or ...

Some years ago, the Supreme Court concluded that “the body or identity of a defendant or respondent in a criminal or civil proceeding is never itself suppressible as a fruit of an unlawful arrest, even if it is conceded that an unlawful arrest, search, or interrogation occurred.” INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, ...

The defendant in this case believed that a friend, one Ronald Merrit, stole several hundred dollars from him. To get revenge, he sent a letter addressed to President Clinton signed with Merrit’s name which contained threats of violence against the President and his family. The subsequent investigation led to the ...

Here the Court held that the Apprendi rule does not require the jury to make a finding that the defendant discharged a firearm in order for the defendant to be subjected to an increased mandatory minimum sentence under 18 USC § 924(c)(a)(A)(iii).

One of the issues raised on appeal be ...

Here the Court that the L.A. D.A. was not entitled to absolute immunity in a civil rights suit with regard to a number of allegations of misconduct, including acquiring and using known false statements in a prosecution against a criminal defense attorney.

This is a compelling and informative decision from ...

In this case, the defendant was given a consecutive 60-month sentence for a § 924(c) firearms offense, as well as a seven level increase in his sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2)(A) based upon a co-conspirator's use of a firearm. In holding that enhancement improper under the provisions of Guideline Amendment ...

This case addresses the application of the present version of 18 U.S.C. § 1114 to a private citizen who was not being formally compensated for his efforts. Section 1114 makes it a federal crime to kill or attempt to kill certain individuals with some connection to the federal government. Earlier ...

This case is noted for one of those typically broad double jeopardy holdings that always seem to allow the government to pursue a successive prosecution on some technically different - but substantively virtually identical - grounds after the defendant has been acquitted the first time around. In this case, the ...

This decision amends in minor respects the en banc court's prior decision reported at 277 F.3d 1173 (9th Cir. 2002) - but again affirmed that the Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey did not render 21 USC § 841 facially unconstitutional.

[See case summary under prior version of ...