DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH Clemency Project 2014

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH Clemency Project 2014"

Transcription

1 DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH 2014 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Clemency Project 2014 Page 1 Filing a Clemency Petition: First Steps Page 2 Recent Third Circuit and Supreme Court Cases Page 4 The 23 rd Annual Maureen Kearney Rowley CJA Panel Training Seminar SAVE THE DATE!! On Thursday, June 12, 2014 the Federal Community Defender Office and the U.S. District Court for the EDPA will host The 23 rd Annual Maureen Kearney Rowley CJA Panel Training Seminar. The program will be held at the William J. Green Federal Building, 600 Arch Street, 2 nd Floor, Phila., PA. Topics will include ethics for federal criminal defense attorneys, Third Circuit and Supreme Court update, and using technology in federal practice. Registration information will be available shortly. Clemency Project 2014 On December 19, 2013, President Obama commuted the prison sentences of eight federal inmates who were convicted of crack cocaine offenses. Each inmate ha[d] been imprisoned for at least 15 years, and six were sentenced to life in prison. Charlie Savage, Obama Commutes Sentences for 8 in Crack Cocaine Cases, N.Y. Times, Dec. 19, 2013, at A1. In commuting the prison sentences of these eight individuals, President Obama acknowledged in a statement that more work needs to be done. Specifically, the President appeared to urge Congress to pass the Smarter Sentencing Act, which would make the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 fully retroactive. But, making the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive will not address the situation of many crack offenders whose sentences have been recognized as unfair.... Margaret Colgate Love, President Obama s Crack Commutations: What s Next, Mr. President?, ACS Blog (1/16/14), For the many offenders who will not benefit from retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act and other federal prisoners whose sentences are unjust clemency is one of the few remaining avenues of justice available. On January 30, 2014, Deputy Attorney General James Cole solicited the assistance of the nation s bar to help the Department of Justice identify federal prisoners who, if sentenced today under current sentencing laws and policies, would likely have received a substantially lower sentence. In response, a number of organizations, including the Federal Defenders, the ACLU, FAMM, the ABA and NACDL formed Clemency Project According to the Statement of Groups Participating in Clemency Project 2014: Clemency Project 2014 is designed to answer Mr. Cole s appeal to the bar. The groups are collaborating in this joint venture to help identify individuals who likely would have qualified for lower sentences if sentenced under current law and policies. Based upon Statements by the Department of Justice, the project anticipates it will focus on prisoners CLEMENCY PROJECT CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 Editors Jennifer Nimmons Herman Attorney Advisor Kimberly Campoli Paralegal/Panel Administrator Federal Community Defender Office for the Eastern District of PA Helen Marino, First Assistant Federal Defender Kai Scott, Chief, Trial Unit Nina Carpiniello Spizer, Assistant Chief Trial Unit Brett Sweitzer, Chief of Appeals

2 MARCH 2014 PAGE 2 Clemency Project continued from Page 1 who have a good prison record, no significant ties to organized crime, a non-violent history, and who are currently serving very lengthy sentences for relatively low-level offenses. Cases that appear to meet those standards will be referred to participating Federal Public Defenders and volunteer lawyers. Clemency Project 2014 will provide free training, support and resources for those lawyers to help ensure that the highest quality petitions are prepared and transmitted to the Department of Justice on an expedited basis. Statement of Groups Participating in Clemency Project 2014, Mar. 4, 2014, In addition, the Bureau of Prisons will soon be sending notice to inmates outlining the general clemency criteria and advising inmates to the clemency project if they want the assistance of a lawyer. If any CJA Panel members have represented, are representing, or otherwise know of individuals who would be good candidates for clemency, or if you would like to take a clemency case pro bono, please contact Norman Reimer at Filing a Clemency Petition: First Steps Clemency Project 2014 is advising attorneys not to submit petitions directly to the Office of the Pardon Attorney. Instead, the Clemency Project will assist Federal Defenders and pro bono counsel in the preparation of petitions, and then review and forward those petitions in batches to the Office of the Pardon Attorney. The Clemency Project is still in the early stages of identifying cases for submission to the Office of the Pardon Attorney. To determine whether you know of individuals who might be good candidates for clemency, please consider the following criteria and/or contact Norman Reimer at Criteria 1) Must be convicted and sentenced of a drug offense any drug, not just crack. 2) Primary focus: Is the person serving a sentence that likely would be considerably lower if imposed today? This can be because of a change in: a) Statutory law FSA should include not only crack offenders who would get lower sentences under the FSA, but also those who would not because of the operation of quantity, 851s, or the career offender guideline. b) Court interpretations of the law Decisions holding what previously was a career offender predicate, no longer a predicate. FILING A CLEMENCY PETITION CONTINUED ON PAGE 3

3 MARCH 2014 PAGE 3 In Memoriam With sadness, the Federal Community Defender Office notes the passing of Temple University Professor Edward D. Ohlbaum, Director of Trial Advocacy and Clinical Legal Education and Professor of Law. A former Public Defender with the Defender Association of Philadelphia, Eddie was instrumental in building Temple s championship trial advocacy program. The legal community has lost a tireless advocate. Jeffrey M. Lindy, Esquire CJA Panel Representative Eastern District of PA Please contact Jeff Lindy with any CJA issues, comments, or concerns: Lindy & Tauber 1221 Locust Street Third Floor Philadelphia, PA (215) Booker decision rendering the mandatory guidelines advisory especially if coupled with comments by the sentencing court indicating that the mandatory guideline sentence was too severe. c) DOJ charging policy if quantity or 851s would not be charged under the Aug. 12th and 29th Holder memos look at these policies closely. d) Long sentences that were the result of some egregious error that nobody caught at the time and now is unable to be corrected through habeas. 3) Within that group: Filing a Clemency Petition continued from Page 2 Life or near life 20 years at the very least Clean record in prison or misconduct is remote and/or minor Not a threat to public safety as indicated by conduct while in prison + nature of offense Non-violent instant offense Firearms should not be automatically disqualifying. Two of the eight commuted in December had a gun. Using a gun would be disqualifying, but having a gun, and especially someone else in the group having a gun, probably would not be Low-level drug offenders ideal if mitigating role adjustment or no role adjustment, but aggravating role adjustment is not automatically disqualifying. Four of the eight commuted in December had role enhancements. Being the leader of a cartel is one thing; being a leader or supervisor in a group that gets together to sell drugs is another No significant ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels First offenders Offenders with fairly innocuous priors taking our cue from the Holder memo, a conviction that is remote in time, aberrational, or for conduct that itself represents non-violent low-level drug activity should be OK, as should an offense that is no longer a crime of violence Includes career offenders and those with 851s Pre-Booker if sentence length was driven by the guidelines Significant if Judge at the time said s/he would impose a lower sentence if s/he could, though not absolutely necessary FILING A CLEMENCY PETITION CONTINUED ON PAGE 4

4 MARCH 2014 PAGE 4 Filing a Clemency Petition continued from Page 3 Basic Information (include as much info as you have) Name first, last, middle BOP Register Number BOP facility Offense(s) of conviction Criminal History District where sentenced Date Sentenced Length of sentence and what drove it Mandatory guidelines? Career offender guideline? Mandatory minimum based on quantity? Based on 851s? Was the sentence subsequently modified? If so, to what? Projected Release Date Current/most recent attorney Has a petition already been filed? If so, was it denied or is it still pending? Explain briefly why s/he would receive a lower sentence today. Do you want to represent the person, have the project find someone else, or don t know yet? Recent Third Circuit and Supreme Court Cases Christofer Bates, RWA, EDPA Supreme Court Aiding and Abetting / Accomplice Liability / 924(c) Rosemond v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2014 WL (Mar. 5, 2014). To convict for aiding and abetting a violation of 924(c), government must show at least (1) that defendant acted to further the underlying offense (crime of violence or drug crime); and (2) that defendant had advance knowledge that a gun will be involved, meaning knowledge sufficiently early to give him a realistic opportunity to quit the crime. A defendant need not intentionally facilitate or encourage the use/carrying/possession of the gun. advance knowledge is a jury question, and might even include knowledge gained during the commission of the offense if defendant continues to participate/fails to object and realistically could have done otherwise this is an instructional issue we gain the advance knowledge jury argument, and lose the no encouragement argument RECENT 3d CIR CASES CONTINUED ON PAGE 5

5 MARCH 2014 PAGE 5 Recent 3d Cir Cases continued from Page 4 in brandishing cases, government should have to show advance knowledge of brandishment, not just use/carrying/possession (probably no need to show advance knowledge in discharge cases, per Dean v. U.S., 556 U.S. 568 (2009)) Fourth Amendment / Consent to Search / Objecting Party Not Present Fernandez v. California, --- U.S. ---, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1636 (Feb. 25, 2014). Although police may generally search a jointly occupied premises if one of the occupants consents, there is a narrow exception where consent of one occupant is insufficient if another occupant is present and objects to the search. Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006). Randolph does not apply where the objecting occupant is not present when another occupant consents, even if his absence is caused by his lawful arrest after objecting to the search. Freezing Assets / Forfeiture / Challenging Probable Cause Kaley v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1634 (Feb. 25, 2014). A defendant does not have a constitutional right to relitigate a grand jury s prior determination of probable cause to believe he or she committed the crimes charged at a pre-trial hearing to contest the legality of the government s asset seizure under 21 U.S.C. 853(e)(1), even if the defendant wants to use the seized assets to hire an attorney. A defendant may challenge only whether there is probable cause that the assets are traceable to the charged offense. this had been Third Cir law all along Unauthorized Re-Entry At Military Installation / Protest Area and Easement United States v. Apel, --- U.S. ---, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1643 (Feb. 26, 2014). It is a federal crime to reenter a military installation after having been ordered not to do so by any officer or person in command, pursuant to 18 U.S.C A portion of an Air Force base that contains a designated war protest area and an easement for a public road qualifies as part of the military installation under the statute. The Court did not decide whether 1382 would be unconstitutional as applied to this protestor. That issue was reserved for consideration on remand. Cert. Granted - FRE 606(b) / Juror Dishonesty During Voir Dire Warger v. Shauers, No (Cert. Granted Mar. 3, 2014). ISSUE: Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) permits a party moving for a new trial based on juror dishonesty during voir dire to introduce testimony about statements made during deliberations that tend to show the alleged dishonesty. THIRD CIR: No (in dictum) RECENT 3d CIR CASES CONTINUED ON PAGE 6

6 MARCH 2014 PAGE 6 Third Circuit Crime-Fraud Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege In re Grand Jury Subpoena, --- F.3d ---, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2593 (Feb. 12, 2014). Recent 3d Cir Cases continued from Page 5 (1) Before a district court can undertake an in camera examination of an attorney-witness to determine the applicability of the crime-fraud exception, the party seeking to overcome the privilege must make a showing of a factual basis adequate to support a good faith belief by a reasonable person that in camera review of the materials may reveal evidence to establish the claim that the crime-fraud exception applies. This standard applies even to oral communications with the attorney. See United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 572 (1989). (2) The district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the corporation and client from the attorney s in camera interview or declining to release a transcript or summary of the testimony. Even though some of the information regarding the investigation is public, the content of the investigation is entitled to protection as a grand jury secret. (3) The district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the crime-fraud exception applied. The exception applies where there is a reasonable basis to suspect that the privilege holder was committing or intending to commit a crime or fraud at the time the communications were made, and that the attorney-client communications or attorney work product were used in furtherance of the alleged crime or fraud (it is not enough that the communications merely relate to the fraud). Although an attorney informing a client about the criminality of a proposed action does not trigger the exception, here the attorney provided information about the types of conduct that violate the law, thus enabling the client to use to use the information to further the crime. It was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to find that there was a reasonable basis to conclude that the attorney s advice was used by the client to fashion conduct in furtherance of the crime, given that the client stated he would undertake the conduct notwithstanding the advice of illegality. (4) A crime-fraud finding overcomes the work product privilege. Appellate Waiver / Consecutive Sentence for VOSR United States v. Banks, --- F.3d ---, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2094 (Feb. 12, 2014). Banks consecutive sentences for a new bank fraud conspiracy conviction and his supervised release violation were encompassed by his waiver of his right to appeal the sentence imposed by the court so long as the sentence fell within or below the guideline range. Consecutive sentencing was directly contemplated by the plea agreement, and since it was not explicitly excepted from the appellate waiver provision, the waiver covered the district court s imposition of a consecutive sentence on the supervised release violation. There was no miscarriage of justice here since the consecutive terms equaled 51 months, which was well below the statutory maximum of 30 years for the bank fraud offense. RECENT 3d CIR CASES CONTINUED ON PAGE 7

7 MARCH 2014 PAGE 7 Recent 3d Cir Cases continued from Page 6 Sufficiency of Indictment / Severance / V.I. Kidnaping / Sufficiency of Evidence / Prosecutorial Misconduct / Evidentiary Issues United States v. John-Baptiste, --- F.3d ---, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2969 (3d Cir. Feb. 19, 2014). (1) The indictment specified the time period in which the alleged crimes occurred but did not identify the alleged victims. This was enough specificity to allow Defendant Brooks to assert a future double jeopardy claim. (2) John-Baptiste s joint trial with his co-defendants did not lead to clear and substantial prejudice and did not result in a manifestly unfair trial. The evidence against his co-defendants was much more extensive, but nothing in the record suggested that the jury was unable to compartmentalize the evidence as it related to separate defendants, and the district court s instructions to the jury adequately conveyed its duty to consider each count and each defendant s guilt separately and individually. (3) The Virgin Islands false imprisonment and kidnaping statute requires the defendant to act without lawful authority. John-Baptiste s status as a former police officer with authority to make lawful arrests did not shield him from prosecution under this statute, because the detention in this case was for the unlawful purpose of collecting ransom. Similarly, the statute is not unconstitutionally vague, because it adequately puts police on notice that they cannot hold someone in custody for personal gain until ransom is paid. (4) The Court reversed the district court s order granting Defendants Brooks and Edwards Post-Verdict Rule 29 motions for conspiracy and extortion under the Hobbs Act. Extortion requires proof that the defendant knowingly and willfully obtained the victim s property through coercion resulting from wrongful force, threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right, and that this obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate commerce. Here, the victim placed money on the dashboard of Edwards police vehicle, so there was no direct evidence the victim s payment to recover his impounded truck went directly to Edwards. The circumstantial evidence, however, was sufficient to sustain the jury s guilty verdict. Edwards had repeatedly told the victim how much he would have to pay to get his truck back, she told him she had been taking money from people for 19 years, she ordered him to put the money on the dashboard, and the victim later saw the tow truck driver with only a few hundred dollars in his hands. Likewise, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury s guilty verdict on the conspiracy to commit extortion charge related to Brooks and Edwards. Brooks sat in the police vehicle silently as Edwards told the victim she had been taking money from people for 19 years. Evidence of an explicit agreement was not required, and the evidence proved more than just Brooks mere presence. Based on the unique circumstances of the case, the jury could have assumed that when one police officer boasts of committing extortion for almost two decades in the presence of another police officer, there must be an agreement and that the agreement arises from a longstanding pattern of activity and mutual trust between the two. (5) The district court also improperly set aside the jury s verdict on the drug conspiracy count arising from Brooks and Edwards coercing someone to sell crack cocaine for them. There was no direct evidence that Edwards knew it was drugs in the bag when she handed it over for sale, but the circumstantial evidence was sufficient. The charged conduct took place in 2009, which was several years into a longstanding pattern of illegal activity between Edwards and Brooks that in the past had involved recruiting people to sell drugs for them. RECENT 3d CIR CASES CONTINUED ON PAGE 8

8 MARCH 2014 PAGE 8 Recent 3d Cir Cases continued from Page 7 (6) Brooks was not entitled to a new trial on the RICO Conspiracy count on the basis that the jury considered acquitted conduct in convicting him on that count. If the jury convicts the defendant on two or more of the predicate acts constituting a RICO violation, the conviction on the RICO count itself withstands challenge even if the jury acquitted the defendant on several counts charging other predicates. (7) The government did not commit prosecutorial misconduct. First, the agent improperly pointed out Edwards to one of the victims during the lunch break after the victim had not been able to identify Edwards in the courtroom. The district court properly addressed this situation by holding a hearing, and the government did not ask the victim to identify Edwards upon the resumption of his direct testimony after the lunch break. Further, the victim s testimony that was contrary to police officer testimony was a credibility issue for the jury to resolve. Second, the government did not commit a Brady violation by omitting an exculpatory portion of a recorded conversation with a federal agent. Although this portion was not played for the jury, the entire tape was offered into evidence, and defense counsel was able to cross-examine with the exculpatory portion of the tape. Therefore, even if the evidence was suppressed by the government, there was no prejudice to Brooks. Third, a controversy surrounding a government witness s identify and possible use of multiple social security numbers did not amount to the government suborning perjury in violation of the defendant s due process rights. Although the government should have done more pre-trial investigation into the issues surrounding the identity of its witness, there was no clear showing that the witness perjured himself and the testimony did not prejudice the entire case. The witness s testimony only pertained to five counts that were dismissed at the close of the government s case. (8) Evidentiary errors raised by defendants: First, the Court upheld the district court s decision to limit the cross-examination of certain government witnesses. Second, the district court acted within its discretion in limiting defense witnesses testimony about an incident with a victim to what they saw, not what they heard. The statements John-Baptiste sought to introduce did not qualify as legally operative statements ( verbal acts ), and to the extent the testimony would have qualified under the state of mind hearsay exception, there was other non-hearsay evidence that adequately informed the jurors on this point. Third, the district court properly limited defense counsel s attempt to cross-examine the police chief with one of the victim s prior inconsistent statements, because the victim was not afforded an opportunity to admit or deny the prior inconsistent statement before such extrinsic evidence was offered. See FED. R. EVID Finally, the district court did act within its discretion in allowing a witness to testify in rebuttal to Edwards alibi defense. Edwards properly notified the government of her alibi defense under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(a) as it pertained to two counts of conviction, but her trial testimony expanded the defense. The court properly allowed the government to expand the testimony of its pertinent witness under Rule 12.1(3) to address Edwards expanded alibi. RECENT 3d CIR CASES CONTINUED ON PAGE 9

9 MARCH 2014 PAGE 9 Recent 3d Cir Cases continued from Page 8 Motion to Suppress / Standing / Protection From Abuse Order United States v. Cortez-Dutrieville, --- F.3d ---, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3596 (3d Cir. Feb. 26, 2014). Dutrieville did not have standing to challenge the anticipatory warrant to search his girlfriend s residence. Although he was an overnight guest in the home, a valid protection from abuse order prohibited him from entering the home and having any contact with his child s mother. Since his presence in the home was illegal, any subjective expectation of privacy he had there was not one that society would recognize as reasonable. Dutrieville also lacked standing to challenge the search of the bag that he brought with him during the unlawful visit to his girlfriend s home. A person legally prohibited from entering a place cannot reasonably expect to use that place as a private place to store his personal belongings. He therefore lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the bag.

10 DEFENSE LINK MARCH 2014 PAGE 10 Leigh M. Skipper, Chief Federal Defender Helen Marino, First Assistant Federal Defender Kai Scott, Chief, Trial Unit Nina Carpiniello Spizer, Assistant Chief, Trial Unit Brett Sweitzer, Chief of Appeals Federal Community Defender Office For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Suite 540 West The Curtis Center 601 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA Phone (215) Contact Jennifer Herman if you have a new address, office address, or telephone number, for any CJA Panel related questions, or if you wish to withdraw from the CJA Panel for the EDPA. WANT MORE? VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT AND THE THIRD CIRCUIT BLOG AT RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT CONTINUES ON PAGE 11

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES March 6, 2013 Christofer Bates, EDPA SUPREME COURT I. Aiding and Abetting / Accomplice Liability / 924(c) Rosemond v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2014 WL 839184

More information

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER NOVEMBER 2014 INSIDE THIS ISSUE

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER NOVEMBER 2014 INSIDE THIS ISSUE DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER NOVEMBER 2014 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Collateral Consequences Resource Center Launches Website Page 1 Recent Third

More information

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER APRIL 2015 INSIDE THIS ISSUE

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER APRIL 2015 INSIDE THIS ISSUE DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER APRIL 2015 INSIDE THIS ISSUE FBI Mishandles Evidence Page 1 Recent Third Circuit and Supreme Court Cases

More information

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS. Johnson Update LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS. Johnson Update LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Johnson Update Page 1 Recent Third Circuit and Supreme Court Cases Page

More information

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS HONORABLE JOHN D. BATES Director ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20544 July 31, 2014 MEMORANDUM To: From: Chief Judges, United States Courts of Appeals Chief Judges,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 07-00200-01-CR-W-FJG ) WILLIAM ENEFF, ) ) ) Defendant. )

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 15-00106-01-CR-W-DW TIMOTHY RUNNELS, Defendant. PLEA AGREEMENT

More information

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER MARCH 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Whether Naturalized Citizen May be Deported on

More information

case 3:04-cr AS document 162 filed 09/01/2005 page 1 of 6

case 3:04-cr AS document 162 filed 09/01/2005 page 1 of 6 case 3:04-cr-00071-AS document 162 filed 09/01/2005 page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) Cause No. 3:04-CR-71(AS)

More information

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE Criminal Cases Decided Between May 1 and September 28, 2009, and Granted Review for the October

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 07-00200-06-CR-W-FJG ) MICHAEL FITZWATER, ) ) ) Defendant.

More information

DEFENSE NEWSLETTER IN THIS ISSUE: SUPREME COURT UPDATE... p.1 11TH CIRCUIT CASE SUMMARIES p.1 TABLE OF CASES IN THIS ISSUE. p.5

DEFENSE NEWSLETTER IN THIS ISSUE: SUPREME COURT UPDATE... p.1 11TH CIRCUIT CASE SUMMARIES p.1 TABLE OF CASES IN THIS ISSUE. p.5 IN THIS ISSUE: SUPREME COURT UPDATE... p.1 11TH CIRCUIT CASE SUMMARIES p.1 TABLE OF CASES IN THIS ISSUE. p.5 DEFENSE NEWSLETTER Vol. 14, No. 1 Kaleen M. Williams, Federal Public Defender November 2008

More information

Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step

Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step Criminal Law & Procedure For Paralegals Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step 2 Getting Defendant Before The Court! There are four methods to getting the defendant before the court 1) Warrantless Arrest 2)

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 14 2898 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, ANTWON JENKINS, v. Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court

More information

Case 1:18-cr LM Document 2 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTWCT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE PLEA AGREEMENT

Case 1:18-cr LM Document 2 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTWCT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE PLEA AGREEMENT Case 1:18-cr-00114-LM Document 2 Filed 07/23/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. UNITED STATES DISTWCT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ig F«ssw ^23 P b! 09 MiOEPOSITORY DARREN B. STRATTON PLEA

More information

USA v. Enrique Saldana

USA v. Enrique Saldana 2012 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-30-2012 USA v. Enrique Saldana Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 11-1501 Follow this and

More information

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES May 1, 2014 Christofer Bates, EDPA SUPREME COURT I. Terry Stops / Reasonable Suspicion / Anonymous Tips / Drunk Driving Navarette v. California, --- S. Ct.

More information

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RICHARD IRIZARRY, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RICHARD IRIZARRY, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA No. 06-7517 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES RICHARD IRIZARRY, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs February 2, 2010 BILLY HARRIS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 01-02675 Carolyn Wade

More information

USA v. Edward McLaughlin

USA v. Edward McLaughlin 2016 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-25-2016 USA v. Edward McLaughlin Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2016

More information

TEXAS CRIMINAL DEFENSE FORMS ANNOTATED

TEXAS CRIMINAL DEFENSE FORMS ANNOTATED TEXAS CRIMINAL DEFENSE FORMS ANNOTATED 1.1 SURETY S AFFIDAVIT TO SURRENDER PRINCIPAL Order By Daniel L. Young PART ONE STATE PROCEEDINGS CHAPTER 1. BAIL 1.2 SURETY S AFFIDAVIT TO SURRENDER PRINCIPAL CURRENTLY

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 07-06023-02-CR-SJ-DW ) STEPHANIE E. DAVIS, ) ) Defendant.

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT* Before GORSUCH, SEYMOUR, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT* Before GORSUCH, SEYMOUR, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit TENTH CIRCUIT November 25, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee, v.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. Case No. PRETRIAL AND CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. Case No. PRETRIAL AND CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v., Defendant(s). Case No. PRETRIAL AND CRIMINAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER The defendant(s), appeared for

More information

INTRODUCTION TO THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES

INTRODUCTION TO THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION TO THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES Where to find the Guidelines ONLINE at www.ussc.gov/guidelines In print from Westlaw Chapter Organization Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Offense Conduct Chapter

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS DEMARCUS O. JOHNSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 15-CV-1070-MJR vs. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. ) REAGAN, Chief

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 13-1748 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. KYVANI OCASIO-RUIZ, Defendant, Appellant. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT

More information

An Introduction. to the. Federal Public Defender s Office. for the Districts of. South Dakota and North Dakota

An Introduction. to the. Federal Public Defender s Office. for the Districts of. South Dakota and North Dakota An Introduction to the Federal Public Defender s Office for the Districts of South Dakota and North Dakota Federal Public Defender's Office for the Districts of South Dakota and North Dakota Table of Contents

More information

Criminal Law Table of Contents

Criminal Law Table of Contents Criminal Law Table of Contents Attorney - Client Relations Legal Services Retainer Agreement - Hourly Fee Appearance of Counsel Waiver of Conflict of Interest Letter Declining Representation Motion to

More information

Court Records Glossary

Court Records Glossary Court Records Glossary Documents Affidavit Answer Appeal Brief Case File Complaint Deposition Docket Indictment Interrogatories Injunction Judgment Opinion Pleadings Praecipe A written or printed statement

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2-21-2014 USA v. Robert Cooper Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 09-2159 Follow this and additional

More information

Families Against Mandatory Minimums 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C

Families Against Mandatory Minimums 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C Families Against Mandatory Minimums 1612 K Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20006 202-822-6700 www.famm.org Summary of The Gang Deterrence and Community Protection Act of 2005 Title I Criminal

More information

involved in the transaction, full restitution, a special

involved in the transaction, full restitution, a special IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TH EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) CRIMINAL NO. 1-08 CR 428 ) V- ) Count 1: 18 U.S.C. 1956(h) VIJAY K. TANEJA, j

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Case :-cr-000-sab Document Filed 0/0/ 0 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOHN BRANNON SUTTLE III, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON NO. :-cr-000-sab ORDER

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 2254 (PERSONS IN STATE CUSTODY) 1) The attached form is

More information

2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14984, * DARBERTO GARCIA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. 04-CV-0465

2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14984, * DARBERTO GARCIA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. 04-CV-0465 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14984, * DARBERTO GARCIA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. 04-CV-0465 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

More information

American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary

American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary acquit: affidavit: alibi: amendment: appeal: arrest: arraignment: bail: To set free or discharge from accusation; to declare that the defendant is innocent

More information

Case 3:10-cr FDW Document 3 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:10-cr FDW Document 3 Filed 04/07/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOCKET NO. 3:1 OCR59-W v. PLEA AGREEMENT RODNEY REED CAVERLY NOW COMES the United States of America,

More information

Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step

Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step Criminal Law & Procedure For Paralegals Criminal Litigation: Step-By-Step Path of Criminal Cases in Queens Commencement Arraignment Pre-Trial Trial Getting The Defendant Before The Court! There are four

More information

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE Criminal Cases Decided Between September 1, 2010 and March 31, 2011 and Granted Review for

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT VS. : APPEAL NUMBER

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT VS. : APPEAL NUMBER IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Appellant, VS. : APPEAL NUMBER 05-4833 MARC RICKS : Appellee. Petition for Panel Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Under

More information

When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony. Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder

When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony. Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder Federal Felony Definition, generally: a conviction punishable by a term that exceeds one year imprisonment If the term exceeding

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0059p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT CARLOS CLIFFORD LOWE, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, Trevon Sykes - Petitioner. vs. United State of America - Respondent.

NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, Trevon Sykes - Petitioner. vs. United State of America - Respondent. NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 2017 Trevon Sykes - Petitioner vs. United State of America - Respondent. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI Levell D. Littleton Attorney for Petitioner 1221

More information

Obstruction of Justice: An Abridged Overview of Related Federal Criminal Laws

Obstruction of Justice: An Abridged Overview of Related Federal Criminal Laws Obstruction of Justice: An Abridged Overview of Related Federal Criminal Laws Charles Doyle Senior Specialist in American Public Law April 17, 2014 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RS22783

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs October 7, 2008

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs October 7, 2008 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs October 7, 2008 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. VIRGIL SAMUELS Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Henry County No. 13988 Donald E.

More information

REASONS FOR SEEKING CLEMENCY 1

REASONS FOR SEEKING CLEMENCY 1 REASONS FOR SEEKING CLEMENCY 1 In 1998, a Waverly, Virginia police officer, Allen Gibson, was murdered during a drug deal gone wrong. After some urging by his defense attorney and the State s threats to

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Petitioner, Case No BC v. Honorable David M.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Petitioner, Case No BC v. Honorable David M. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION ERIC VIDEAU, Petitioner, Case No. 01-10353-BC v. Honorable David M. Lawson ROBERT KAPTURE, Respondent. / OPINION AND ORDER DENYING

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. File Name: 07a0786n.06. Filed: November 8, Nos and

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. File Name: 07a0786n.06. Filed: November 8, Nos and NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 07a0786n.06 Filed: November 8, 2007 Nos. 06-5381 and 06-5382 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT VINCENT ZIRKER and ROOSEVELT PITTS,

More information

Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...17 FORWARD...23

Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...17 FORWARD...23 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...17 FORWARD...23 A...31 APPEALS District Court to Superior Court Infractions Procedures When Appealing From District Court to Superior Court Pretrial Release State s Right

More information

COUNSEL: [*1] For Plaintiff or Petitioner: Richard Lloret/Kathy Stark, U.S. Attorney's Office, Phila., PA.

COUNSEL: [*1] For Plaintiff or Petitioner: Richard Lloret/Kathy Stark, U.S. Attorney's Office, Phila., PA. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. FREDERICK LEACH CRIMINAL NO. 02-172-14 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13291 July 13, 2004, Decided COUNSEL: [*1]

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION USDC IN/ND case 2:17-cr-00153-JVB-APR document 7 filed 11/17/17 page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) V ) ) Cause No. 2:17

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Cite as: U. S. (1998) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,

More information

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit 17 70 cr United States v. Hoskins In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term, 2017 Argued: January 9, 2018 Decided: September 26, 2018 Docket No. 17 70 cr UNITED STATES OF

More information

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES July 7, 2016 Christofer Bates, EDPA SUPREME COURT I. Double Jeopardy / Separate Sovereigns / Puerto Rico Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle, No. 15-108, 136 S. Ct.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 8:06-cr EAK-TGW-4. versus

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 8:06-cr EAK-TGW-4. versus Case: 12-10899 Date Filed: 04/23/2013 Page: 1 of 25 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-10899 D.C. Docket No. 8:06-cr-00464-EAK-TGW-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

No SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Joseph Jones, Desmond Thurston, and Antuwan Ball Petitioner- Appellants,

No SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Joseph Jones, Desmond Thurston, and Antuwan Ball Petitioner- Appellants, No. 13-10026 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Joseph Jones, Desmond Thurston, and Antuwan Ball Petitioner- Appellants, v. United States, Respondent- Appellee. Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals

More information

THE IMPORTANCE OF AN INDIVIDUALIZED ASSESSMENT: MAKING THE MOST OF RESENTENCING UNDER

THE IMPORTANCE OF AN INDIVIDUALIZED ASSESSMENT: MAKING THE MOST OF RESENTENCING UNDER THE IMPORTANCE OF AN INDIVIDUALIZED ASSESSMENT: MAKING THE MOST OF RESENTENCING UNDER THE AMENDED CRACK COCAINE GUIDELINES I. Background Patricia Warth Co-Director, Justice Strategies On December 10, 2007,

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 09-2956 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, WILLIAM DINGA, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court

More information

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 89 1

NC General Statutes - Chapter 15A Article 89 1 Article 89. Motion for Appropriate Relief and Other Post-Trial Relief. 15A-1411. Motion for appropriate relief. (a) Relief from errors committed in the trial division, or other post-trial relief, may be

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Shelton v. USA Doc. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA MICHAEL J. SHELTON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. No.: 1:18-CV-287-CLC MEMORANDUM

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 09-00296-02-CR-W-FJG ) ERIC G. BURKITT, ) ) ) Defendant.

More information

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-4609 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, versus Plaintiff - Appellee, DAMON BRIGHTMAN, Defendant - Appellant. No. 05-4612 UNITED STATES OF

More information

Case 2:18-cr JPS Filed 03/12/18 Page 1 of 16 Document 3

Case 2:18-cr JPS Filed 03/12/18 Page 1 of 16 Document 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN UNITED STA [ES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 18-CR- CRAIG HILBORN, Defendant. PLEA AGREEMENT 1. The United States of America, by its attorneys,

More information

Case 1:17-cr RC Document 3 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 10. United States v. Michael T. Flynn

Case 1:17-cr RC Document 3 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 10. United States v. Michael T. Flynn Case 1:17-cr-00232-RC Document 3 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 10 U.S. Department of Justice The Special Counsel's Office Washington, D.C. 20530 November 30, 2017 Robert K. Kelner Stephen P. Anthony Covington

More information

Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A

Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A Acquittal a decision of not guilty. Advisement a court hearing held before a judge to inform the defendant about the charges against

More information

acquittal: Judgment that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

acquittal: Judgment that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. GlosaryofLegalTerms acquittal: Judgment that a criminal defendant has not been proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. affidavit: A written statement of facts confirmed by the oath of the party making

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON December 8, 2015 Session

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON December 8, 2015 Session IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON December 8, 2015 Session KENTAVIS JONES v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C-14-251 Donald H. Allen, Judge

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION CHARLES ANTHONY DAVIS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) CV 119-015 ) (Formerly CR 110-041) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Harrison, 2011-Ohio-3258.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 95666 STATE OF OHIO vs. PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE LORENZO HARRISON

More information

Case 2:12-cr AWA-TEM Document 51 Filed 05/09/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID# 147 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THI

Case 2:12-cr AWA-TEM Document 51 Filed 05/09/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID# 147 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THI Case 2:12-cr-00059-AWA-TEM Document 51 Filed 05/09/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID# 147 FILED IN OPEN COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THI EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division MAY -9 2012

More information

USA v. Daniel Castelli

USA v. Daniel Castelli 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-7-2014 USA v. Daniel Castelli Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 12-2316 Follow this and additional

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1387 United States of America, * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of

More information

THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017

THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017 THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017 https://youtu.be/d8cb5wk2t-8 CAREER OFFENDER. WE WILL DISCUSS GENERAL APPLICATION ( 4B1.1) CRIME OF VIOLENCE ( 4B1.2(a))

More information

Case 4:11 cr JMM Document 260 Filed 09/17/12 Page U.S. 1 DISTRICT of 12 COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) No.

Case 4:11 cr JMM Document 260 Filed 09/17/12 Page U.S. 1 DISTRICT of 12 COURT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) No. Case 4:11 cr 00211 JMM Document 260 Filed 09/17/12 Page U.S. 1 DISTRICT of 12 COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FILED SEP 1 7 2012 UNITED

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2016 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-22-2016 USA v. Marcus Pough Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2016

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DOMINICK STANIN, SR. Argued: November 9, 2017 Opinion Issued: March 30, 2018

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DOMINICK STANIN, SR. Argued: November 9, 2017 Opinion Issued: March 30, 2018 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme

More information

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL DIVISION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : : VS. : NO. : :

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL DIVISION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : : VS. : NO. : : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL DIVISION COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : : VS. : NO. : : GUILTY PLEA COLLOQUY EXPLANATION OF DEFENDANT S RIGHTS You or your attorney

More information

1. The location or site where a criminal offence has taken place is called a(n)?

1. The location or site where a criminal offence has taken place is called a(n)? Canadian Law 2204 Criminal Law and he Criminal Trial Process Unit 2 Test Multiple Choice Name: { / 85} 1. The location or site where a criminal offence has taken place is called a(n)? death trap investigative

More information

Case 1:07-cv RHB Document 15 Filed 10/30/2008 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:07-cv RHB Document 15 Filed 10/30/2008 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Case 1:07-cv-00674-RHB Document 15 Filed 10/30/2008 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ANTHONY EASON, v. Movant, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

USA v. Anthony Spence

USA v. Anthony Spence 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2-3-2014 USA v. Anthony Spence Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 13-1395 Follow this and additional

More information

HOW A CRIMINAL CASE PROCEEDS IN FLORIDA

HOW A CRIMINAL CASE PROCEEDS IN FLORIDA HOW A CRIMINAL CASE PROCEEDS IN FLORIDA This legal guide explains the steps you will go through if you should be arrested or charged with a crime in Florida. This guide is only general information and

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr WTM-GRS-1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr WTM-GRS-1 Case: 17-10473 Date Filed: 04/04/2019 Page: 1 of 14 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 17-10473 D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr-00154-WTM-GRS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED January 19, 2016 v No. 323727 Branch Circuit Court STEVEN DUANE DENT, a/k/a JAMES LC No. 07-048753-FC

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2006 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 12-4-2006 USA v. Rivera Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 05-5329 Follow this and additional

More information

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA U.S. SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL LAW UPDATE Criminal Cases Decided Between April 1, 2010 and August 31, 2010 and Granted Review for the

More information

*Zarnoch, Graeff, Friedman,

*Zarnoch, Graeff, Friedman, UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 169 September Term, 2014 (ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION) DARRYL NICHOLS v. STATE OF MARYLAND *Zarnoch, Graeff, Friedman, JJ. Opinion by Friedman,

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2013 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-15-2013 USA v. Isaiah Fawkes Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 11-4580 Follow this and

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 08-00297-05-CR-W-FJG ) CYNTHIA D. JORDAN, ) ) Defendant.

More information

Courtroom Terminology

Courtroom Terminology Courtroom Terminology Accused: formally charged but not yet tried for committing a crime; the person who has been charged may also be called the defendant. Acquittal: a judgment of court, based on the

More information

Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements. If you can t avoid them, deflect them.

Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements. If you can t avoid them, deflect them. Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements If you can t avoid them, deflect them. ACCA - mandatory 15 year sentence: Who does it apply to? Defendant must: be adjudicated guilty under 18 U.S.C.

More information

Controlling Pre Trial Publicity

Controlling Pre Trial Publicity Controlling Pre Trial Publicity A court is obligated to try to make sure the defendant gets a fair trial. Doing this may include controlling the information released by the press. The US DOJ issued the

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2003 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 9-30-2003 USA v. Holland Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 02-4481 Follow this and additional

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. KENNETH CONLEY No. 12 CR 986 Judge Gary Feinerman PLEA AGREEMENT 1. This Plea Agreement between the

More information

Case 1:09-mj JMF Document 3 Filed 01/12/2009 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PLEA AGREEMENT

Case 1:09-mj JMF Document 3 Filed 01/12/2009 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PLEA AGREEMENT Case 1:09-mj-00015-JMF Document 3 Filed 01/12/2009 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) V. ) ) DWAYNE F. CROSS, ) ) Defendant. ) Case

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, ) v. ) No CR-W-FJG. Defendant.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, ) v. ) No CR-W-FJG. Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 08-000297 03-CR-W-FJG ) RONALD E. BROWN, JR., ) ) Defendant.

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0071n.06 Filed: January 26, No

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0071n.06 Filed: January 26, No NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0071n.06 Filed: January 26, 2006 No. 04-3431 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. JERMALE PITTMAN : T.C. Case No. 01-CR-740

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. JERMALE PITTMAN : T.C. Case No. 01-CR-740 [Cite as State v. Pittman, 2002-Ohio-2626.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : vs. : C.A. Case No. 18944 JERMALE PITTMAN : T.C. Case No. 01-CR-740

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Nos. 04-2032, 04-2293 & 04-2309 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. DARRON J. MURPHY, SR., Defendant-Appellant,

More information

Case 1:08-cr SLR Document 24 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:08-cr SLR Document 24 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 1:08-cr-00040-SLR Document 24 Filed 07/14/2008 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Criminal Action No. 08-40-SLR

More information