This is one of those cases that shows what can happen when a large group of defendants are tried together in a single trial - especially when the trial involves drugs - and most especially when the drug at issue is cocaine base. Here, Jonathan Parker, one of 18 defendants, ...

Here the Court held that insufficient evidence existed that a city or a city department received over $10,000 per year in federal funding as required to satisfy an element of 18 U.S.C. § for defendants' convictions of theft by fraud and bribery.

After the defendants in this case were convicted ...

This multi-defendant drug conspiracy case dealt with a number of issues. The principle issue addressed dealt with the Government's adherence to the wiretap laws; and on that issue the Court held that evidence obtained from wiretaps was correctly allowed where the government made an adequate showing of necessity, and the ...

Here the Court granted habeas relief after concluding that the state court determination that the defendant had waived his right to a jury trial was unreasonable and contrary to clearly established federal law. At the trial, the state court judge addressed defendant's counsel regarding the trial of the case without ...

A conviction for possessing a firearm while subject to a domestic violence protective order did not violate the Second Amendment or the Commerce Clause, and the district court abused its discretion in granting a downward departure based on purported conduct outside the heartland of such offenses.

This was a civil action for damages by the plaintiff police officer against various defendants, officers and attorneys, alleging violation of his substantive due process rights and malicious prosecution. In a previous en banc decision reported at 296 F.3d 638 (8th Cir. July 5, 2002), the Eighth Circuit remanded the ...

Here the Court held that the New York City Police Department may not arrest drug addicts who are carrying syringes containing drug residue if they are participating in a needle exchange program.

In this latest ruling in a long-standing class action lawsuit against Rikers Island over its refusal to offer educational programs to youthful offenders, Judge Motley firmly ordered prison officials to comply with both state and Federal law.

Several years ago, Candace Chambliss of Northwestern University Law School wrote a brilliant ...

This case is noted for its exhaustive review and comprehensive analysis of the law on the issue of the admissibility of handwriting identification evidence, under the standards mandated by the Daubert and Kumho Tire cases.

This case is noted for its comprehensive review of the law dealing with the admissibility ...

The "relevant conduct" provision of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 is not facially unconstitutional under Apprendi, and Apprendi does not apply to appellant's sentence because it did not exceed the statutory maximum for
the crime to which he pleaded guilty.

Here the Court held that, while challenges to the validity of a sentence must be brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 in the district where the sentencing court was located, a prisoner "may attack the execuction of his sentence through [28 U.S.C.] § 2241 in the district where he is ...

Here the Court held that the district court’s ruling that all drugs seized from a drug addict were intended for distribution was “clearly erroneous” since it was plausible that some of the drugs were intended for personal consumption.

One of the issues raised in this case was whether the district ...

The petitioner in this case, Mark Lomholt, was convicted in 1996 of two counts of second degree sexual abuse, primarily on the testimony of the two victims, a four-year old female and a five year old female, and his own confession. In the instant habeas petition, Lomholt argued that he ...

In 2000, Congress enacted one of those proverbial wonders of modern day penal legislation - the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act (42 U.S.C. § 14135a et seq.) (the DNA Act). Among other things, the DNA Act requires U.S. Probation Officers to collect a DNA blood sample (drawn by a “licensed ...

A depravity of mind, aggravating circumstances jury instruction at a capital penalty phase was unconstitutional, and error was not cured under Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639, a procedure unavailable after a jury finding of aggravated or mitigating circumstances.

The issue before the Court in this case was whether offenses that are similar in nature but arise from discrete circumstances and were committed two years apart can be grouped when sentencing occurs in a consolidated proceeding. The defendant first pled guilty to multiple counts of wire fraud and conspiracy ...

Prior to this decision, the Eleventh Circuit reversed and vacated defendant's convictions for armed robbery based on its determination that the reasons for requiring defendant to wear a stun belt during the trial were not adequately set out in the record. (See U.S. v. Durham, 287 F.3d 1297 (11th Cir. ...

This case is an extremely rare case of judicial racism and pique. This decision followed District Judge Charles Shaw's earlier decision, reported at 213 F.Supp.2d 1067 (E.D.Mo. 2002), where Judge Shaw - a Black judge - finally decided to recuse himself from a case - but only after blasting the ...

Here the Eleventh Circuit joined with a majority of the Circuits in holding that a successful motion to file an out-of-time notice of appeal is not to be counted as a first petition for the purposes of subsequent collateral proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Court observed: "AEDPA does ...

In this case the petitioner/prisoner appealed the dismissal of his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion, that was filed within 10 days after the denial of his second 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion; and that appeal raised the issue of whether motions under that rule to alter or amend judgments ...

The defendant in this case was charged with racketeering, racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, and eight substantive counts of money laundering. A magistrate judge ordered the defendant detained. The defendant filed a motion to revoke the magistrate's detention order, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.S. § 3145(b).

The Government alleged that the ...

This case is noted for it review of an important question: does a waiver of appeal provision in a plea agreement automatically bar a subsequent claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Although the Fifth Circuit had not yet addressed that precise question, other Circuits have and they have all ...