As explained by the Court, the Apprendi issue raised in this case was as follows: " Adams also challenges his sentence on the ground that his prior convictions were determined by the district court by a preponderance of the evidence at sentencing, rather than submitted to the jury and proven ...

Here the Court held that federal criminal gun-control laws do not violate the Second Amendment unless they impair the state's ability to maintain a well-regulated militia - a decision that sharply clashes with the 5th Circuit's ruling in U.S. v. Emerson.

In this case, the Court rejected a challenge to ...

Here the Court held that order imposed under the provisions of 21 USC § 862 that made the defendant ineligible for such benefits for five years was improper since, as a cooperating witness, he qualified for an exemption from such denial of benefits.

This case presents a microcosm of the ...

In Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 86 (1986) the Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment governs the exercise of peremptory challenges by a prosecutor in a criminal trial and that the "[p]urposeful racial discrimination in selection of the venire violates a defendant's right ...

In this post-Bailey case, the Court held that the words "in furtherance of" in the new provisions of 18 USC § 924(c)(1)(A) requires that the gun must "promote or facilitate" the underlying crime - and mere possession is insufficient.

Following the Supreme Court's decision in Bailey v. U.S., 516 U.S. ...

Here the Court held, by a 5 to 4 vote, that Bivens actions should not be extended to cover civil rights claims against a private prison corporation operating a halfway house under contract with the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

In Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp. (CSC), 229 F.3d 374 (2nd ...

Here the Court vacated a robbery conviction under the Hobbs Act and remanded back to the district court for further determinations as to whether the defendant's actions had some cumulative effect on interstate commerce.

This is an important Fourth Amendment decision that deals with the permissible scope of police questioning during routine traffic stops. The law governing that topic was established by the Supreme Court in its seminal decision, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). As noted by Judge Lucero in his dissent, ...

Here, in a decision subsequently reversed by the Seventh Circuit, the Court granted habeas relief based on its finding that the 14 year old defendant's confession was not voluntary under clearly established Federal law.

Petitioner, a state court prisoner, sought habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 from his ...

Here the Court rejected a challenge to a 468 month sentence imposed on a defendant when the court - not the jury - determined the quantity of drugs in violation of Apprendi - on the basis of "overwhelming" evidence of the quantity of drugs involved.

In this case the defendant ...

In this case, the Court originally issued a Cetrificate of Appealability to the petitioner to raise his Apprendi claim after the district court had dismissed his collateral appeal as untimely filed. The petitioner had argued that Apprendi was a decision of such "watershed magnitude" that it should apply retroactively to ...

Here the 6th Circuit rejected an Apprendi challenge to a life sentence based on the district court's finding of an intentional killing during a drug conspiracy under 21 USC § 848(e)(1)(A) stating that such aggravating factors do not require a jury finding.

In rejecting the appellants Apprendi challenge to the ...

This case arose out of a civil rights complaint for damages that was filed in 1993 against DEA officials and agents for their April 1990 kidnaping of the plaintiff, Humberto Alvarez-Machain (Alvarez), a Mexican physician. Dr. Alvarez was indicted in 1990 for participating in the 1985 torture-murder of DEA agent ...

This case is noted for its interpretation of one of the events that trigger the commencement of the one year limitations period set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Clause (4) of that statute provides that one event that starts the running of the one-year limitations period is “the date ...

If the Guideline sentencing range for a particular defendant exceed 24 months, the law quite clearly requires a sentencing judge to state in open court, at the time of sentencing, its reasons for the imposition of the particular sentence chosen within that range. (18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(1)). A number of ...

Here the Court remanded a habeas appeal back to the district court because it had dismissed the appeal as untimely without reaching a conclusion whether Apprendi applies retroactively to collateral attacks.

In this case, the Seventh Circuit found that the Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. ...

After the defendant in this case was sentenced to 265 months in prison for drug crimes, he appealed - arguing that his sentence violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) because his indictment did not charge, and the jury was not asked to determine, the quantity of drugs ...

The District Court for the District of Montana sentenced defendant under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) (18 U.S.C. § 924(e)), which mandates a minimum sentence of 15 years for any person who violates the felon-in-possession statute, 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g), and who has three previous convictions for violent felonies ...

In this case the Third Circuit held that the district court had committed plain error when it selected the defendant’s sentence from the wrong Guideline sentencing range; and that, even though the sentence imposed fell within the correct range, the error presumptively affected the defendant’s substantial rights and impaired his ...

This decision is noted for Judge Tjoflat’s highly persuasive dissent on the topic of the retroactive use of Apprendi on appeals. That dissent is particularly noteworthy because it eschews the common approach to the Apprendi retroactivity arguments (“My God, it will open up the floodgates of appeals”) and instead focuses ...