Skip navigation

Search

7 results
Article • September 1, 2002 • from P&J June, 2002
U.S. v. Longoria, No. 00-50405 (5th Cir.) (298 F.3d 367) (July 12, 2002) (Per Curiam) by Here the en banc Court held that the failure to charge drug quantity in an indictment is not jurisdictional in nature and that, in determining whether there is reversible error, it is proper for …
Article • May 1, 2001 • from P&J May, 2001
Becker v. Montgomery, No. 00-6374 (U.S. Supreme Court) (532 U.S. 757; 121 S.Ct. 1801) (May 29, 2001) (Justice Ginsburg) by In this case, the petitioner, Dale Becker, a prisoner in Ohio, instituted a pro se civil rights action in a Federal district court, contesting the conditions of his confinement. Upon …
Article • February 1, 2001 • from P&J February, 2001
U.S. v. Wilkes, No. CR. 97-10235-NG (D.Mass.) (130 F.Supp.2d 222) (February 20, 2001) (Judge Nancy Gertner) by Not surprisingly, in this Sentencing Memorandum, Judge Gertner has written an important addition to the body of Apprendi jurisprudence. Here, preempted by the First Circuit’s hasty rush to judgment on a number of …
Article • February 1, 2001 • from P&J February, 2001
Burton v. U.S., No. 98-20294 (5th Cir.) (237 F.3d 490) (December 22, 2000) (Per Curiam) by
Article • January 1, 2001 • from P&J January, 2001
U.S. v. Tran, No. 99-1278(L) (2nd Cir.) (234 F.3d 798) (November 15, 2000) (Judge Fred I. Parker) by Here the Court held that the omission of an element in the indictment limits the court's subject-matter jurisdiction to trying, convicting, and sentencing the defendant solely on the facts and offenses charged …
Article • December 1, 2000 • from P&J December, 2000
U.S. v. Nance, No. 00-1836 (7th Cir.) (236 F.3d 820) (December 29, 2000) (Judge Diane P. Wood) by Here the Court held that, under Apprendi, before a defendant can be sentenced above the default statutory maximum, the drug quantity must be charged in the indictment and found by the jury …
Article • November 1, 2000 • from P&J November, 2000
U.S. v. Mojica-Baez, No. 98-2349 (1st Cir.) (229 F.3d 292) (August 30, 2000) (Judge Sandra L. Lynch) by Here the Court held that harmless error analysis applies to the failure to allege an element of a crime in the indictment - a ruling that is in conflict with pre-Apprendi decisions …