Showing posts with label Criminal Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Criminal Law. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

US v. Barnes, No. 06-2129
Suppression of evidence seized during a body cavity search is vacated and remanded where further proceedings are necessary to determine whether an officer ordering the search possessed sufficient credible information to establish a reasonable suspicion that defendant was concealing drugs internally

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Habeas corpus there is a clearly established federal due process protection against a trial court's reliance on materially false information at senten

Stewart v. Erwin, No. 05-4635
Denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in a sexual battery case is reversed and remanded to supplement the record or grant the writ as: 1) although there is no clearly established federal constitutional right to full disclosure of all information used by a trial judge in determining a defendant's sentence; 2) there is a clearly established federal due process protection against a trial court's reliance on materially false information at sentencing; and 3) it was not possible to ascertain whether such a violation might have occurred here, where a portion of the materials used in determining the sentence have been withheld from federal court review, and where the limited record suggested a reasonable possibility that at least some of the sentencing information might have been erroneous.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

court impermissibly and prejudicially participated in plea negotiations with defendant

US v. Baker, No. 06-3115
Sentence based on guilty plea to fraud and related offenses is vacated where the court impermissibly and prejudicially participated in plea negotiations with defendant

Monday, June 04, 2007

the magnitude of the variance and method of calculation were unreasonable

US v. Allen, No. 06-6111
In a case involving a variance of more than 2.5 times the top end of the U.S.S.G. recommended range, whatever latitude a sentencing court may have to adjust a sentence in an exercise of Booker discretion, it may not discard the advisory Guideline range and impose sentence on the basis of evidence of a defendant's uncharged, unrelated misconduct, whether actually committed or contemplated for the future. A sentence for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute is vacated where, although the sentencing court may consider defendant's unrelated, non-charged conduct in fashioning a sentence, the magnitude of the variance and method of calculation were unreasonable.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

district court erred in imposing an obstruction of justice enhancement

US v. Abdul-Aziz, No. 06-3032
A conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm is vacated in part as to the sentence and remanded where the district court erred in imposing an obstruction of justice enhancement based on perjury as the record did not establish with the required clarity that the court exercised its independent judgment in reaching the decision to impose the enhancement

Thursday, May 10, 2007

district court erred by conflating the two steps of the analysis for an abuse of trust enhancement laid down in US v. Reccko, 151 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 19

US v. Parrilla, No. 05-1566
Sentences for conspiracy to transport cocaine are vacated where the district court erred by conflating the two steps of the analysis for an abuse of trust enhancement laid down in US v. Reccko, 151 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 1998

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish the necessary mens era requirement.

US v. Nieves-Castano, No. 06-1517 (1st Cir. March 27, 2007)
Conviction for possession of a machine gun is reversed and a verdict for defendant ordered where the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to establish the necessary mens era requirement. Conviction for possession of a firearm within a school zone is affirmed over defendant's argument that the statute is unconstitutionally void for vagueness under the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because it fails to specify how to measure the 1000 foot distance from a school that marks the boundary of a school zone. The sentence is remanded for reconsideration in light of the reversal of the first charge.
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/061517.html

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

confession to a crime that had been obtained illegally by police

The Justices rejected an appeal seeking to test an equally divided Mississipi Supreme Court ruling that involved the admission of a confession to a crime that had been obtained illegally by police in violation of the suspect's rights under Miranda v. Arizona. The state court found the admission was an error, but found that it was "harmless" because there was "overwhelming" evidence to support the conviction. The case was Haynes v. Mississippi (06-7827).

Sunday, March 25, 2007

government's confession of error.

US v. Latu (03/19/07 - No. 05-10815)
A conviction for two counts of illegal possession of a firearm is affirmed in part but reversed in part where: 1) 18 U.S.C. section 922(g)(5)(A) is constitutional under the Commerce Clause and was properly applied in defendant's case; but 2) a conviction for violating section 922(g)(5)(B) is reversed pursuant to the government's confession of error.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0510815p.pdf

Friday, March 23, 2007

COPA Ruled Unconstitutional

COPA Ruled Unconstitutional
ACLU V. GONZALES
March 22, 2007

A federal judge rules that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), a law intended to protect children from sexually explicit and pornographic online materials, is unconstitutional.

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/cberlaw/aclugnzls32207copa.pdf

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Jones v. Bock, 127 S. Ct. 910 (2007)

Freeman v. Watkins, No. 06-1394 (10th Cir. March 16, 2007)
In a prisoner's 42 U.S.C. section 1983 case asserting six violations of his constitutional rights, dismissal of his case for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies is reversed pursuant to the Supreme Court's recent decision in Jones v. Bock, 127 S. Ct. 910 (2007), which specifically abrogated the "total exhaustion" requirement and held that failure to exhaust is an affirmative defense under the PLRA, and inmates are not required to specially plead or demonstrate exhaustion in their complaints.
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/061394.html

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Sentences for narcotics conspiracy are remanded

US v. Mansoori, No. 04-1950 (7th Cir. March 13, 2007)
Sentences for narcotics conspiracy are remanded so that the district court may consider whether it would have sentenced them differently knowing that the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory rather than binding, but one defendant's sentence is affirmed where the district court stated that it would not sentence him differently treating the Guidelines as advisory rather than binding.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/041950p.pdf

Monday, March 12, 2007

guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute heroin, is vacated

US v. Kaba, No. 05-3813 (2d Cir. March 08, 2007)
Sentence, based on a guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute heroin, is vacated where the district court impermissibly based its sentence on defendant's West-African heritage and thereby rendered the sentence invalid.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/053813p.pdf

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

mid-Guideline range, was

USA v. RAJWANI No. 0510648cr1p - 02/23/2007
In sum, we conclude that the financial vulnerability of
victims and the related emotional hardship make this case somewhat
atypical and justify an upward departure. However, the Sentencing
Commission has substantially accounted for these aggravating
characteristics of the defendant’s conduct by providing for a
vulnerable victim enhancement and an enhancement based on the
amount of the fraud. While we recognize the deference due a
district court’s sentence, we find no circumstance in this case
that takes it so far beyond the heartland of fraud offenses as to
“eviscerate the Guidelines of all applicability.” The district
court’s sentence, which is 3 times the mid-Guideline range, was
therefore unreasonable. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM Rajwani’s conviction.
However, we VACATE Rajwani’s sentence and REMAND the case to the
district court for resentencing consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED IN PART.
VACATED IN PART.
REMANDED.