Skip navigation

Search

47 results
Page 3 of 3. « Previous | 1 2 3 |

Article • November 1, 1995
U.S. v. Snell, No. CR 95-10084-NG (D.Mass.) (899 F.Supp. 17) (August 25, 1995) (Judge Nancy Gertner) by This case contains an excellent review of the purposes and historical bases of the Brady rule and the Jenck's Act. The Brady rule was announced by the Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland, …
Article • October 1, 1995
U.S. v. Wrenn, No. 94-2089 (1st Cir.) (66 F.3d 1) (September 25, 1995) (Judge Sandra L. Lynch) by This case involves an appeal by a defendant who contends that he gave the Government all the information required to qualify him for a reduction of sentence below the mandatory minimum under …
Article • September 1, 1995
U.S. v. Vance, No. 94-10245 (9th Cir.) (62 F.3d 1152) (August 7, 1995) (Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld) by Here the Court holds that "the district court cannot consider the defendant's refusal to discuss the offense with the probation officer as evidence weighing against acceptance of responsibility.". This case covers an …
Article • August 1, 1995
U.S. v. Rodriguez, No. 94-60733 (5th Cir.) (60 F.3d 193) (July 21, 1995) (Judge John M. Jr. Duhé) by Case held that a probation officer is not "the Government" for purposes of the safety valve statute and that giving information to the probation officer did not satisfy the statute.
Article • June 1, 1995
U.S. v. Jones, No. 94-1391 (7th Cir.) (52 F.3d 697) (April 17, 1995) (Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner) by A case that shows some of the evils that are attendant to the interview with the Probation Officer who is preparing the Presentence Report. Here, the Probation Officer recommended that the defendant …
Article • May 1, 1995
U.S. v. Leonard, No. 94-1175 (2nd Cir.) (50 F.3d 1152) (March 28, 1995) (Judge Roger J. Miner) by This decision contains an important analysis of what is required of a defendant to qualify for the three point Guideline reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 (Acceptance of Responsibility). The district court had …
Article • January 1, 1995
U.S. v. Cabell, No. 94-236 (CRR) (D.D.C.) (890 F.Supp. 13) (June 16, 1995) (Judge Charles R. Richey) by This is a multi-issue Guideline case where Judge Richey holds, inter alia, that the defendant met the "safety valve" provisions of § 5C1.2 of the Guidelines. Here the Government argued that he …
Page 3 of 3. « Previous | 1 2 3 |