In Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the Supreme Court addressed an important question concerning the role of the Fourth Amendment in the confrontation on the street between the citizen and the policeman investigating suspicious circumstances; and it adopted what has become known as the Terry “investigative stop” rule: ...

Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to hear the government's appeal (filed after the jury was sworn, several government witnesses testified, and the District Court, on the government's motion, reconsidered and clarified its initial ruling), both because the District Court did not dismiss the indictment and because retrial barred by the ...

Here the Court addressed a huge, shopping-list of "accusations and allegations" against its key witness that the Government wanted to prevent the defense from raising or introducing into evidence; which it resolved by splitting everything down the middle.

This case speaks volumes about the efforts to which the Government will ...

This case is noted principally for its concise explanation of the four generally recognized exceptions to the good faith rule established by the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).

The defendant in this case pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ...

The defendant in this case argued that the government improperly referred to a prior arrest and prior conviction under the guise of impeachment and that the district court improperly admitted such evidence. While the Ninth Circuit generally agreed that the prosecutor had acted imroperly - probably egregiously so - the ...

This is an important Guidelines case, because it is the first case we have seen that both questions and challenges the widely held (but relatively recent) assumption that U.S.S.G. § 5G1.2(d) gives the Government virtual blanket authority to insist on the imposition of consecutive sentences whenever it decides that the ...

Here, although the court found the use of the word “and” in U.S.S.G. § 3A1.1(b) “troubling,” it concluded that vulnerable victim status is not limited to those hurt by the offense of conviction, but also includes those hurt by relevant conduct.

The defendant in this case, an attorney, pled guilty ...

Here the Court refused to overrule the district court's refusal to grant a preliminary injunction requiring the Government to return the list of names of the members of plaintiff's tax protester organization on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction.

In this case an appeal from denial of a preliminary injunction ...

The defendant in this case was convicted of three counts of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine, and was initially sentenced to 32 years' imprisonment for each conviction, with the sentences to run concurrently. On appeal, that sentence was held to violate Apprendi, and the sentence was vacated in a decision reported ...

In this case the Court held that a threat to seek damages and use false evidence in a lawsuit, was neither "wrongful" under the Hobbs Act nor a "scheme to defraud" under the mail-fraud statute, thus attempted extortion and mail-fraud convictions are reversed, and conspiracy convictions are vacated. In its ...

In this case the Second Circuit held that a New York Cirt law allowing the seizure of vehicles from those arrested for the misdemeanor cime of driving while intoxicated is unconstitutional. The Court held that the law, § 14-140 of the city's Civil Administrative Code, violates the due process clause ...

In this case the Government tried to exercise broad jurisdiction rights over a foreign national which, had it been done by China or Iraq, would have immediately led to a major international confrontation. In this case, the defendant, Andrea Cafiero, a citizen of Italy, was a passenger on a non-domestic ...

Here the Court vacated a sentence based on a multi-object conspiracy for mail fraud and money laundering because the district court failed to make findings beyond a reasonable doubt on each of the objects of the conspiracy.

Among the many issues raised on this multi-defendant, multi-issue appeal was an appeal ...

In this case, the petitioner was convicted of conspiring to manufacture and distribute marijuana after police officers discovered that a co-defendant was operating huge underground greenhouse on petitioner's property. The sentencing court determined that petitioner was responsible for 26,400 marijuana plants, and sentenced him to 121 months incarceration, one month ...

Here the Court held that the U.S. could prosecute a foreign national, who was a passenger on a plane that was diverted to the U.S., on drug charges, since the involuntary nature of his presence in the country was immaterial to his crime.

This case involves an arrogant exercise of ...

The inmate's first trial ended in a mistrial. Following the second trial, the district court determined that the inmate had been deprived of his right to due process of law because of prosecutorial misconduct in that the prosecutor failed to correct and, indeed, actively promoted the false impression that a ...

The defendant in this case appealed his convictions and 105-year sentence by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida for transporting a minor in foreign commerce with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, conspiracy to travel in foreign commerce with the intent to engage in ...

Here, in an extended discussion of the meaning of "total punishment" under the Guidelines, and the impact, if any, of Apprendi on the district court's authority to impose consecutive sentences on a defendant convicted of multiple counts, the Court stated:

"Section 5G1.2(d) of the Guidelines provides that

If the sentence ...

In this case, the Court held that the district court's failure "to state in open court" (as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)) it reasons for imposing a 7-level upward departure (to a life sentence) was not plain error that warranted sentencing relief. The Court explained:

"This court has yet ...

Judge Edmunds continues to give Attorney General Ashcroft fits. Following her decision in Detroit Free Press v. Ashcroft, 195 F.Supp.2d 937 (E.D.Mich. 2002) (see P&J, 8/5/02), where she held that the DOJ had acted unlawfully in holding hundreds of deportation hearings in secret based only on the Government’s assertion of ...

This is one of those cases that shows the perplexing “them and us” standards espoused by our Government that causes so much enmity towards the United States. For months now the United States has stood alone in its unilateral and vociferous opposition to exposing any U.S. citizens to prosecution by ...