STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
|
|
- Loreen Weaver
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
2 QUESTION: When is a fish NOT a tangible object?
3 ANSWER: Yates v. United States, 135 S. Ct (2015): Was a fish a tangible object for purposes of 18 U.S.C (prohibiting knowing destruction of any record, document, or tangible object with intent to obstruct)?
4 HELD: NO! [A]lthough dictionary definitions of the words tangible and object bear consideration, they are not dispositive of the meaning of tangible object in Id. at Using various tools of statutory construction, Court held that tangible object for purposes of 18 U.S.C was limited to tangible objects used to record or preserve information. Id. at ; see also id. at (Alito, J., concurring in the judgment).
5 The goal of statutory construction is to ascertain the intent of the drafters As Yates shows us, although dictionary definitions of words are a consideration, they are not the be-all and end-all of the statutory construction process Other considerations both textual and nontextual play a role in that process
6 TEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS
7 Basic principle Statutory language must be read in context. words are chameleons, which reflect the color of their environment Judge Learned Hand in Commissioner v. National Carbide Corp., 167 F.2d 304, 306 (2d Cir. 1948).
8 Context Matters A statute should be read as a harmonious whole, with its separate parts being interpreted within their broader statutory context.
9 Ordinary v. Specialized Meaning Words are to be understood in their ordinary meaning unless the context indicates that they bear a technical sense.
10 Technical or Specialized Meaning? Defined in the statute RICO enterprise in 18 U.S.C Defined elsewhere in the Code Dictionary Act, 1 U.S.C. 1 6 Defined at common law Congress assumed to know and incorporate Defined by precedent Stare decisis canon
11 Ordinary Meaning Dictionaries Black s Law Dictionary & Regular Dictionaries But can have multiple definitions So again must consider Context Not to make a fortress of the dictionary. Judge Learned Hand in Cabell v. Markham, 148 F.2d 737, 739 (2d Cir 1945).
12 Canons of Construction Used to draw inferences about the meaning of statutory language Tools rather than rules 187 different canons were used in opinions by the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts! there are two opposing canons on almost every point
13 Whole Act Rule Give effect, if possible, to all statutory language Statutes should be construed to avoid rendering any statutory language superfluous
14 Rule of the Last Antecedent A limiting clause should ordinarily be read as modifying only the noun or phrase that it immediately follows. But that rule is not an absolute and can assuredly be overcome by other indicia of meaning. Paroline v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1710, 1721 (2014) (citing United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415 (2000)).
15 Sample Grammatical Rules and/or definite/indefinite article shall/may singular/plural tense punctuation
16 Bad Grammar Rule The statute is awkward, and even ungrammatical; but that does not make it ambiguous. Lamie v. United States Trustee, 540 U.S. 526, 534 (2004). Permits editing grammar in statutes. aggravated felony includes a crime of violence... for which the term of imprisonment at least one year.
17 Some Latin Canons Noscitur a sociis Ejusdem generis Expressio unius est exclusio alterius
18 Noscitur a sociis A word is known by the company it keeps.
19 Noscitur a sociis In child pornography statute, words promotes and presents were read in context of string of operative verbs including advertises, distributes, and solicits to require a transactional connotation. United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285, 294 (2008)
20 Ejusdem generis When a general phrase follows a list of specifics, it should be read to include only things of the same type food
21 Ejusdem generis burglary, arson, extortion, and... use of explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another enumerated offenses read as limiting the residual clause to crimes roughly similar in kind as well as in degree of risk posed Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (2008)
22 Expressio unius est exclusio alterius The inclusion of one is the exclusion of others
23 Expressio unius est exclusio alterius When Congress explicitly enumerates certain exceptions, additional exceptions are not to be implied. Federal statute specifically pre-empting state laws punishing employers implies the lack of pre-emption for state law punishing those who seek or accept employment. Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492, 2520 (2012) (J. Scalia, dissenting opinion).
24 Some Other Canons Same Phrasing in Same or Related Statutes A term appearing in several places in statutory text is generally read the same way each time it appears Different Phrasing in Same Statute Particular language included in one section of a statute but omitted in another is assumed to be intentional
25 Congress Knows How to Say An interpretation may be rejected because when Congress means that interpretation it knows how to say it For or because of any official act in 18 U.S.C. 201(c) required a nexus. Congress knows how to prohibit payments without regard to purpose, see 209. United States v. Sun Diamond, 526 U.S. 398 (1999)
26 Other Tools
27 Titles/Headings May shed light on ambiguous language. But cannot limit the plain meaning of the text or add to it. As suggested by its title, the Armed Career Criminal Act focuses upon the special danger created when a particular type of offender... possesses a gun. Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137, 147 (2008)
28 Findings/Purposes Sections Applying general principle that statutory language should be interpreted in a manner consistent with statutory purpose. In defining RICO enterprise, Court considered that Congressional Statement of Findings and Purpose was the eradication of organized crime. United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981)
29 Legislative History
30 Plain Meaning Rule Courts are not to rely on legislative history when the statutory language is plain. Only when the statute is ambiguous. Exception: when the plain meaning would produce an absurd result.
31 Plain v. Ambiguous Disagreement over when ambiguous. The notion that because the words of a statute are plain, its meaning is also plain, is merely pernicious oversimplification. Justice Frankfurter in United States v. Monia, 317 U.S. 424, 432 (1943)
32 Legislative History Matters Even if the language is plain, courts refer to legislative history to support their interpretation or to refute a contrary interpretation.
33 Legislative Process
34 Bill introduced into the House or Senate (H.R.#; S.#) Sent to Committee May be sent to Subcommittee Hearings Comes out of Committee with a Report (H. Rept. #; S. Rept. #) Floor debates & Roll call votes Passes one chamber, sent to next (repeat) Sent to President
35 Types of Legislative History Drafting History of the Statute Committee Reports Hearings Congressional Debates Roll Call Votes Presidential Signing Statements
36 Drafting History of Statute Extremely useful form of legislative history Comparing the various versions of the bill as it moved through the legislative process Arguments regarding the meaning of a statutory term may be made based on the inclusion, deletion, or modification of language in the text of the bill.
37 Committee Reports Most important Usually a report from each committee Reports usually reprint the text of the bill, describe its purposes, and give reasons for the committee s recommendations Reports often include the legislative history of the bill May have a section-by-section analysis
38 Conference Committee Reports The Gold Standard of Committee Reports Come at the end of the legislative process May give reasons for the compromises that were made
39 Congressional Debates Can be useful if they include discussions for or against proposed bills and amendments Congressional Record contains a transcript of the floor debates Not necessarily verbatim
40 Not Considered Persuasive Hearings because testimony reflects the views of the parties testifying not necessarily the views of Congress Presidential Signing Statements made after the fact and not part of the process
41 Subsequent Congressional Acts Statements by a later Congress about earlier statute are not persuasive Subsequent legislation declaring the intent of earlier statute is persuasive Congress reenacting a statute and leaving it unchanged after judicial interpretation May be viewed as Congress having ratified the judicial interpretation
42 Sources of Legislative History Don t recreate the wheel USCCAN Congress.gov Westlaw LH database Lexis/Nexis Heinonline.org ProQuest Legislative
43 Use Legislative History Despite the controversies, it is being ineffective as a lawyer not to research and argue legislative history for your client since Courts routinely look to it.
44 NONTEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS
45 Constitutional doubt/ constitutional avoidance [W]here a statute is susceptible of two constructions, by one of which grave and doubtful constitutional questions arise and by the other of which such questions are avoided, [the court s] duty is to adopt the latter. United States ex rel. Attorney General v. Delaware & Hudson Co., 213 U.S. 366, 408 (1909) (citation omitted)
46 Constitutional doubt/ constitutional avoidance Thus, [a] statute must be construed, if fairly possible, so as to avoid not only the conclusion that it is unconstitutional, but also grave doubts upon that score. United States v. LaFranca, 282 U.S. 568, 574 (1931) (citations omitted)
47 Constitutional doubt/ constitutional avoidance Two caveats: Alternative reading must be fairly possible There must be grave doubt about the constitutionality of the primary reading; it is not enough that it simply raises an unanswered, or even a merely somewhat doubtful, constitutional question. Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, (1998)
48 Constitutional doubt/ constitutional avoidance See United States v. X-Citement Video, 513 U.S. 64 (1994) (relying in part on constitutional doubt principle to reject the most natural grammatical reading of statute)
49 Federalism/ clear statement requirement [U]nless Congress conveys its purpose clearly, it will not be deemed to have significantly changed the federal-state balance. [W]e will not be quick to assume that Congress has meant to effect a significant change in the sensitive relation between federal and state criminal jurisdiction. United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 349 (1971)
50 Federalism/ clear statement requirement What this means is, the more a crime looks like a purely local one, traditionally punished under a State s police power, the clearer it must be that Congress intended to make it a federal crime, e.g.: Jones v. United States, 529 U.S. 848, 858 (2000) (invoking principle to reject reading of 18 U.S.C. 844(i) that would encompas[s] the arson of an owneroccupied private home[,]... a paradigmatic common-law state crime )
51 Federalism/ clear statement requirement A very recent example: Bond v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 2077, (2014) (invoking principle to hold that defendant s use of small amounts of toxic chemicals against romantic rival was not the use of a chemical weapon punishable under 18 U.S.C. 229)
52 Presumption in favor of mens rea /scienter
53 Presumption in favor of mens rea /scienter The contention that an injury can amount to a crime only when inflicted by intention is no provincial or transient notion. It is as universal and persistent in mature systems of law as belief in freedom of the human will and a consequent ability and duty of the normal individual to choose between good and evil. A relation between some mental element and punishment for a harmful act is almost as instinctive as the child s familiar exculpatory But I didn t mean to,.... Morrissette v. United States, 342 U.S. 246, (1952)
54 Presumption in favor of mens rea /scienter There is thus a presumption favoring mens rea. Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600, 606 (1994). [O]ffenses that require no mens rea are disfavored, and [the Court] ha[s] suggested that some indication of congressional intent, express or implied, is required to dispense with mens rea as an element of a crime. Id. (citations omitted).
55 Presumption in favor of mens rea /scienter What about where the statute DOES contain a mens rea /scienter, but it is unclear how far that mens rea / scienter travels down the statute? At one time, it seemed as though the Supreme Court presumed that a scienter requirement applied only to each of the statutory elements that criminalize otherwise innocent conduct. X-Citement Video, 513 U.S. at 72.
56 Presumption in favor of mens rea /scienter It now appears, however, that the Supreme Court has adopted the view that a statutory mens rea ordinarily applies to ALL of the elements of the offense, without any requirement that they mean the difference between innocent conduct and otherwise. See Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 556 U.S. 646, (2009). This comports with the Model Penal Code, which suggests that a scienter requirement applies to all material elements of the offense. See MPC
57 Remedial Legislation See, e.g., Tcherepnin v. Knight, 389 U.S. 332, 336 (1967) ( In addition, we are guided by the familiar canon of statutory construction that remedial legislation should be construed broadly to effectuate its purposes. )
58 Rule of Lenity
59 Rule of Lenity In these circumstances where text, structure, and history fail to establish that the Government s position is unambiguously correct [the courts] apply the rule of lenity and resolve the ambiguity in [the defendant s] favor. United States v. Granderson, 511 U.S. 39, 54 (1994)
60 Rule of Lenity Be aware though, that, some formulations of the rule of lenity appear to make it much tougher to meet: The rule of lenity, however, is not applicable unless there is a grievous ambiguity or uncertainty in the language and structure of the Act, such that even after a court has seized everything from which aid can be derived, it is still left with an ambiguous statute. The rule of lenity comes into operation at the end of the process of construing what Congress has expressed, not at the beginning as an overriding consideration of being lenient to wrongdoers. Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453, 463 (1991) (internal quotation marks, brackets, and citations omitted)
61 Rule of Lenity We like the way Justice Scalia has put it: Even if the reader does not consider the issue to be as clear as I do, he must at least acknowledge, I think, that it is eminently debatable and that is enough, under the rule of lenity, to require finding for the petitioner here. Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223, 246 (1993) (Scalia, J., dissenting)
62 Rule of Lenity At least three current Justices believe that it is not consistent with the rule of lenity to construe a textually ambiguous penal statute against a criminal defendant on the basis of legislative history. United States v. R.L.C., 503 U.S. 291, 307 (1992) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment) (joined by Justices Kennedy and Thomas); see also id. at
63 Rule of Lenity Note that in Granderson the Supreme Court appeared to suggest that the rule of lenity is defendant-specific. See Granderson, 511 U.S. at 57 n.15. Arguably, this means that where a statute is ambiguous and subject to different interpretations, you should go with the interpretation most beneficial to the defendant.
64 A Case Study: Yates v. United States
65 A Case Study: Yates v. United States Dictionary definitions of tangible and object NOT DISPOSITIVE Caption of 1519 and title of enacting section of Sarbanes-Oxley Act 1519 s position within applicable chapter of U.S. Code
66 A Case Study: Yates v. United States Timing of passage of 1519 with respect to another statute and avoiding reading that would make that other statute superfluous Noscitur a sociis Ejusdem generis Rule of lenity
67 Good luck!
68 JUDY FULMER MADEWELL Assistant Federal Public Defender Appellate Section Western District of Texas 727 E. César E. Chávez Blvd., Suite B-207 San Antonio, Texas Fax: BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION EDUCATION B.A. with Highest Honors, University of Texas at Austin J.D. with Honors, University of Texas at Austin PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Assistant Federal Public Defender, Western District of Texas, Appellate Section, since 1998 Assistant District Attorney, Bexar County District Attorney s Office, 1995 to Trial and Appellate Sections Briefing Attorney, Judge Sam Houston Clinton, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 1994 to 1995 ACADEMIC ACTIVITIES Adjunct Professor of Law, St. Mary s Law School, since Constitutional Criminal Procedure, Federal Criminal Law, Texas Criminal Procedure Instructor, Appellate Writing Workshop for Federal Defenders, Washington, D.C., 2003 to present Adjunct Professor, Criminal Justice Department, University of Texas at San Antonio, 2001 to Legal Research and Writing judy_madewell@fd.org
69 Timothy Crooks Tim Crooks graduated with a B.S. (summa cum laude) from Tulane University in 1983, and received his J.D. (magna cum laude) from Tulane Law School in Immediately after graduating from law school, he clerked for Associate Justice Walter F. Marcus, Jr., of the Louisiana Supreme Court. After short stints in private practice and as a staff attorney at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Mr. Crooks joined the office of the Federal Public Defender, Northern District of Texas, where he served as an Assistant Federal Public Defender from 1990 to June of 2001, and the Chief of Appeals from 1993 to In July of 2001, he joined the office of the Federal Public Defender for the Southern District of Texas, where he presently serves as the Chief of the Appellate Section in Houston, Texas. He was named an Outstanding Assistant Federal Public Defender at Advanced Seminar for Federal Defenders, Minneapolis, Minnesota, May In 2014, he was awarded the Gregory S. Coleman Outstanding Appellate Lawyer Award by the Texas Bar Foundation. Mr. Crooks briefed and argued the federal death penalty case of Louis Jones v United States before the United States Supreme Court in , and he assisted in the United States Supreme Court briefing and oral argument preparation for Almendarez- Torres v United States in He was lead counsel in Reymundo Toledo-Flores v. United States, U.S. Sup. Ct. No , argued before the Supreme Court in October Term He served as the President of the National Association of Federal Defenders from 2005 until He is a Governor Emeritus of the Board of Governors of the Bar Association of the Fifth Federal Circuit. tim_crooks@fd.org
MID-TERM MULTIPLE CHOICE ANSWER KEY April 24, b. Latin for a thing is known by its companions.
MID-TERM MULTIPLE CHOICE ANSWER KEY April 24, 2015 1. The textual canon ejusdem generis is best described as: a. A tool to clarify the meaning of a broad catch-all term at the end of a list of more specific
More informationNo. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. October Term 2013
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term 2013 DANIEL RAUL ESPINOZA, PETITIONER V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More information2010] RECENT CASES 761
CRIMINAL LAW SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEVENTH CIR- CUIT HOLDS THAT INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER IS NOT A CRIME OF VIOLENCE FOR SENTENCING GUIDELINES RECIDIV- ISM ENHANCEMENT. United States v. Woods, 576 F.3d
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 555 U. S. (2009) 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
More informationThe Scribes Journal of Legal Writing (Forthcoming 2014)
The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing (Forthcoming 2014) Bamboozled by a Comma: The Second Circuit s Misdiagnosis of Ambiguity in American International Group, Inc. v. Bank of America Corp. Kenneth A. Adams
More informationLEGISLATIVE INTERPRETATION
Spring 2009 1 LEGISLATIVE INTERPRETATION Discuss all provisions, even if it s just one sentence w/ minimal facts and why it would not apply Definition at the time of statute Research if there could be
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 10-50231 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:08-cr-01356- AJW-1 HUPING ZHOU, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
15 3313 cr United States v. Smith In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM 2016 No. 15 3313 cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. EDWARD SMITH, Defendant Appellant.
More informationCase 3:15-cr EMC Document 83 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I.
Case :-cr-00-emc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. KEVIN BAIRES-REYES, Defendant. Case No. -cr-00-emc- ORDER
More informationCASENOTES. Paroline v. United States, 134 S. Ct (2014). J.D. MARSH
CASENOTES CRIMINAL LAW CHILD PORNOGRAPHY RESTITUTION UNDER 18 U.S.C. 2259 LIMITED TO THE INJURY PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE INDIVIDUAL POSSESSOR S CRIME. Paroline v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1710 (2014).
More informationThe Federal Courts. Chapter 16
The Federal Courts Chapter 16 3 HISTORICAL ERAS OF INFLUENCE 1787-1865 Political Nation building (legitimacy of govt.) Slavery 1865-1937 Economic Govt. roll in economy Great Depression 1937-Present Ideological
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 563 U. S. (2011) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 10 5443 CHARLES ANDREW FOWLER, AKA MAN, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More informationNO. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM 2006
NO. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM 2006 LARRY BEGAY, vs. Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
More informationNo IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. DOYLE RANDALL PAROLINE, Petitioner,
No. 12-8561 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States DOYLE RANDALL PAROLINE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND AMY UNKNOWN, Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
More informationAPPLICABILITY OF 18 U.S.C. 207(c) TO THE BRIEFING AND ARGUING OF CASES IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPRESENTS A PARTY
APPLICABILITY OF 18 U.S.C. 207(c) TO THE BRIEFING AND ARGUING OF CASES IN WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPRESENTS A PARTY Section 207(c) of title 18 forbids a former senior employee of the Department
More informationThe Jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens: Selected Opinions on the Jury s Role in Criminal Sentencing
The Jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens: Selected Opinions on the Jury s Role in Criminal Sentencing Anna C. Henning Legislative Attorney June 7, 2010 Congressional Research Service CRS Report for
More informationSUPREME 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 informationCASE COMMENT TO ENFORCE A PRIVACY RIGHT: THE SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY CANON AND THE PRIVACY ACT S CIVIL REMEDIES PROVISION AFTER COOPER
CASE COMMENT TO ENFORCE A PRIVACY RIGHT: THE SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY CANON AND THE PRIVACY ACT S CIVIL REMEDIES PROVISION AFTER COOPER Federal Aviation Administration v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1441 (2012) Daniel
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 556 U. S. (2009) 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
More informationLuna-Torres v. Lynch
PRACTICE ALERT Luna-Torres v. Lynch An Alert for Practitioners May 20, 2016 WRITTEN BY Manny Vargas, Dan Kesselbrenner, and Andrew Wachtenheim Practice Advisories published by the National Immigration
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION DEFENDANT S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Case Number: XXXXXXX XXXXXX, Defendant. DEFENDANT S SENTENCING MEMORANDUM DEFENDANT, XXXXXXXX,
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROBERT F. MCDONNELL,
Appeal: 15-4019 Doc: 59 Filed: 03/06/2015 Pg: 1 of 18 No. 15-4019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROBERT F. MCDONNELL, Defendant-Appellant.
More informationPublic Law: Legislation and Statutory Interpretation
Louisiana Law Review Volume 17 Number 2 The Work of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the 1955-1956 Term February 1957 Public Law: Legislation and Statutory Interpretation Dale E. Bennett Repository Citation
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 98,856. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellant, KRISTI MARIE URBAN, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 98,856 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellant, v. KRISTI MARIE URBAN, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Interpretation of a statute raises a question of law over which
More information1 California Criminal Law (4th), Introduction to Crimes
1 California Criminal Law (4th), Introduction to Crimes I. NATURE OF CRIMINAL LAW A. [ 1] In General. B. [ 2] Commentary. C. [ 3] Scope of Treatment. D. [ 4] Nature of Crime. E. [ 5] Necessity of Punishment.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before LUCERO, BACHARACH, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 8, 2015 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. Plaintiff - Appellee,
More informationOFFICE 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 informationSupreme Court of the United States
NO. 08-5274 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL DEAN, Petitioner, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More informationHow to Understand Statutes and Regulations
INDEX Aboriginal rights, protection of, 252, 259, 265-269 Aboriginal treaties, 265-268 extrinsic materials and interpretation See Extrinsic materials, Aboriginal treaties and interpretive principles Aboriginal
More informationROGERS v. UNITED STATES. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit
252 OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus ROGERS v. UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit No. 96 1279. Argued November 5, 1997 Decided January 14, 1998 Petitioner
More informationSEPARATION OF POWERS. Wisconsin Constitution. Wisconsin Constitution 9/26/2016
Strong States, Strong Nation TOP 10 LEGAL PRINCIPLES LEGISLATIVE STAFF SHOULD KNOW AND BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN 1. SEPARATION OF POWERS Wisconsin Constitution Wisconsin Constitution The legislative power shall
More informationNO. 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 informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 50. September Term, 2003 STATE OF MARYLAND BENJAMIN GLASS AND TIMOTHY GLASS
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 50 September Term, 2003 STATE OF MARYLAND v. BENJAMIN GLASS AND TIMOTHY GLASS Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell Harrell Battaglia Eldridge, John C. (Retired, specially
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. No (D.C. Nos. 1:16-CV LH-CG and ALFONSO THOMPSON,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit January 9, 2018 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee,
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee
Case: 15-40264 Document: 00513225763 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/08/2015 No. 15-40264 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMOND ESTRADA,
More informationContracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Spring Contract Terms
Contracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Contract Terms I. Construing and Interpreting Contracts A. Purpose: A court s primary concern is to ascertain
More informationContracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Spring Contract Terms (Expanded)
Contracts Professor Keith A. Rowley William S. Boyd School of Law University of Nevada Las Vegas Contract Terms (Expanded) I. Construing and Interpreting Contracts A. Purpose: A court s primary concern
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 12-40877 Document: 00512661408 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/12/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED
More informationInterpretation of Statues
Interpretation of Statues By: CA Kamal Garg Interpretation of Statues - Meaning Interpretation means: 1. ascertaining what intention is conveyed by a statute, 2. expressly or impliedly, 3. so far as is
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SEREINO
More informationTHE 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 informationIs it Automatic?: The Mens Rea Presumption and the Interpretation of the Machinegun Provision of 18 U.S.C. 924(c) in United States v.
Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice Volume 34 Issue 3 Electronic Supplement Article 5 March 2014 Is it Automatic?: The Mens Rea Presumption and the Interpretation of the Machinegun Provision
More informationState v. Tolliver 140 OHIO ST.3D 420, 2014-OHIO-3744, 19 N.E.3D 870 DECIDED SEPTEMBER 2, 2014
State v. Tolliver 140 OHIO ST.3D 420, 2014-OHIO-3744, 19 N.E.3D 870 DECIDED SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 I. INTRODUCTION On September 2, 2014, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued a final ruling in State v. Tolliver,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number BC v. Honorable David M.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION Plaintiff, Case Number 03-20028-BC v. Honorable David M. Lawson DERRICK GIBSON, Defendant. / OPINION
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 113,233 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, BRANDON M. DAWSON, Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 113,233 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. BRANDON M. DAWSON, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed. Appeal from Shawnee District
More informationIn the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of Richmond, on Friday, the 15th day of September, 1995.
VIRGINIA: In the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of Richmond, on Friday, the 15th day of September, 1995. Norton Bowman, Appellant, against Record No. 941911 Circuit
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 11, 2018
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 11, 2018 12/06/2018 CYNTOIA BROWN v. CAROLYN JORDAN Rule 23 Certified Question of Law from the United States Court of Appeals for
More informationSupreme Court Hears Argument to Determine Whether Mandatory Federal Restitution Statute Covers Professional Costs Incurred by Corporate Victims
Supreme Court Hears Argument to Determine Whether Mandatory Federal Restitution Statute Covers Professional Costs Incurred by Corporate Victims April 25, 2018 On April 18, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court
More informationPRACTICE ALERT. Manny Vargas, Dan Kesselbrenner, and Andrew Wachtenheim. July 1, Written By:
PRACTICE ALERT InVoisine v. United States, Supreme Court creates new uncertainty over whether INA referenced crime of violence definition excludes reckless conduct July 1, 2016 Written By: Manny Vargas,
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA NORMAN ROBINSON v. Appellant No. 2064 MDA 2014 Appeal from the Judgment
More informationMotion to Dismiss Indictment
Case 2:08-cr-20585-GER-DAS Document 29 Filed 05/07/2009 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. PETER HENDRICKSON,
More informationNo. 08- IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
No. 08- IN THE Supreme Court of the United States CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL DEAN, v. Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
More informationPUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. v. No
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 23, 2008 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationLOPEZ v. GONZALES & TOLEDO- FLORES v. UNITED STATES: STATE FELONY DRUG CONVICTIONS NOT NECESSARILY AGGRAVATED FELONIES REQUIRING DEPORTATION
LOPEZ v. GONZALES & TOLEDO- FLORES v. UNITED STATES: STATE FELONY DRUG CONVICTIONS NOT NECESSARILY AGGRAVATED FELONIES REQUIRING DEPORTATION RYAN WAGNER* I. INTRODUCTION The United States Courts of Appeals
More informationThe United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of
An Overview of the UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION (Disclaimer: The characterizations in this overview are presented in simplified form and are not to be used for guideline interpretation, application,
More informationWilliam & Mary Bill of Rights Journal. Jake Albert. Volume 25 Issue 2 Article 13
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 25 Issue 2 Article 13 The Flawed Reasoning Behind Johnson v. United States and a Solution: Why a Facts-Based Approach Should Have Been Used to Interpret the
More informationIN 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 informationI. Potential Challenges Post-Johnson (Other Than Career Offender).
I. Potential Challenges Post-Johnson (Other Than Career Offender). A. Non-ACCA gun cases under U.S.S.G. 2K2.1. U.S.S.G. 2K2.1 imposes various enhancements for one or more prior crimes of violence. According
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 08-1071 LEONEL JIMENEZ-GONZALEZ, v. Petitioner, MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, United States Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 06-11543 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States LARRY BEGAY, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, Respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed June 6, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D17-2146 Lower Tribunal No. 07-43499 Elton Graves, Appellant,
More informationTHIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY EMPLOYEES OF A FEDERAL DEFENDER OFFICE AS PART OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES.
Would an Enhancement for Accidental Death or Serious Bodily Injury Resulting from the Use of a Drug No Longer Apply Under the Supreme Court s Decision in Burrage v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 881 (2014),
More informationSupreme Court of Florida
Supreme Court of Florida No. SC02-1523 LEWIS, J. MARVIN NETTLES, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent. [June 26, 2003] We have for review the decision in Nettles v. State, 819 So. 2d 243 (Fla.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:09-cr-00289-DS Document 46 Filed 05/28/10 Page 1 of 13 STEVEN B. KILLPACK (#1808) HENRI SISNEROS (#6653) Utah Federal Public Defender s Office 46 West Broadway, Suite 110 Salt Lake City, UT 84101
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA MARVIN NETTLES, : Petitioner, : v. : CASE NO. SC02-1523 1D01-3441 STATE OF FLORIDA, : Respondent. : / ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL PETITIONER
More informationSUPREME 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 informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JOHN L. YATES, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
No. 13-7451 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JOHN L. YATES, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
More informationUNITED STATES V. MOBLEY: ANOTHER FAILURE IN CRIME OF VIOLENCE ANALYSIS
UNITED STATES V. MOBLEY: ANOTHER FAILURE IN CRIME OF VIOLENCE ANALYSIS Samantha Rutsky I. Introduction... 852 II. Background... 853 A. The History and Use of the United States Sentencing Guidelines 4B1.1-1.2
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ROBERT F. MCDONNELL,
No. 15-4019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROBERT F. MCDONNELL, Defendant-Appellant. On Appeal From the United States District
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 11-2444 United States of America llllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Alfred Tucker lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant No. 11-2489
More informationWRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION BEFORE THE ANTITRUST MODERNIZATION COMMISSION
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION BEFORE THE ANTITRUST MODERNIZATION COMMISSION Hearing on Consideration of Antitrust Criminal Remedies November 3, 2005 Madam Chair, Commissioners,
More informationREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2007 STATE OF MARYLAND OMIED KARMAND
REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 3050 September Term, 2007 STATE OF MARYLAND v. OMIED KARMAND Davis, Eyler, Deborah S., Meredith, JJ. Opinion by Eyler, Deborah S., J. Filed: December
More informationS T A T E O F M I C H I G A N SUPREME COURT. v No Defendant, Dwayne Edmund Wilson, has two prior convictions for possession of a
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan OPINION Chief Justice: Stephen J. Markman Justices: Brian K. Zahra Bridget M. McCormack David F. Viviano Richard H. Bernstein Joan L. Larsen Kurtis T. Wilder FILED
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION * THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Crim. No. DKC-04-0256 * v. Civil No. * KEVIN KILPATRICK BATEN * * * * * * SUPPLEMENT TO
More informationCook v. Snyder: A Veteran's Right to An Additional Hearing Following A Remand and the Development of Additional Evidence
Richmond Public Interest Law Review Volume 20 Issue 3 Article 7 4-20-2017 Cook v. Snyder: A Veteran's Right to An Additional Hearing Following A Remand and the Development of Additional Evidence Shawn
More informationTHE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellant, JEREMY ALLEN MATLOCK, Appellee. No. 2 CA-CR Filed May 27, 2015
IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellant, v. JEREMY ALLEN MATLOCK, Appellee. No. 2 CA-CR 2014-0274 Filed May 27, 2015 Appeal from the Superior Court in Pima County No.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) CASE NO. 1999-27 ) Lt. Case No. 98-3949 STANLEY V. HUGGINS, ) ) Respondent. ) ) RESPONDENT S ANSWER BRIEF ON THE
More informationMedellin's Clear Statement Rule: A Solution for International Delegations
Fordham Law Review Volume 77 Issue 2 Article 9 2008 Medellin's Clear Statement Rule: A Solution for International Delegations Julian G. Ku Recommended Citation Julian G. Ku, Medellin's Clear Statement
More information5 Statutory Interpretation
5 Statutory Interpretation DOES APPLY TO S CIRCUMSTANCES? - E.g. is act authorised/prohibited by provision? (make sure provision was in force at time of relevant event(s)) BEGIN with consideration of the
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 540 U. S. (2003) 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
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 563 U. S. (2011) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 09 834 KEVIN KASTEN, PETITIONER v. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS CORPORATION ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationAmendment to the Sentencing Guidelines
Amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines January 21, 2016 Effective Date August 1, 2016 This document contains unofficial text of an amendment to the Guidelines Manual submitted to Congress, and is provided
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 100,494. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, JOSHUA B. COMAN, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 100,494 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. JOSHUA B. COMAN, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Under Kansas appellate procedure, the appellate court has authority
More informationHon. John 1. Bradshaw, Jr. State Representative Chamber of Commerce Building. Indianapolis, Indiana. Dear Representative Bradshaw:
OPINION 40 It is therefore my opinion that the true nature of the institution in question would determine whether the proposed operation should be included in the hospital license or separately licensed
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D. C. Docket No. 6:16-cr JA-DAB-1. versus
Case: 16-15860 Date Filed: 03/26/2018 Page: 1 of 20 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-15860 D. C. Docket No. 6:16-cr-00003-JA-DAB-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 556 U. S. (2009) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 08 5274 CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL DEAN, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH
More informationUNITED 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 informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION October 27, 2016 9:05 a.m. V No. 330389 Oakland Circuit Court LYMANCE ENGLISH, LC No. 2014-250982-FH
More informationSenate Testimony on the ADA Amendments Act
University of Michigan Law School From the SelectedWorks of Samuel R Bagenstos July 15, 2008 Senate Testimony on the ADA Amendments Act Samuel R Bagenstos Available at: https://works.bepress.com/samuel_bagenstos/24/
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 553 U. S. (2008) 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
More informationIn re Rodolfo AVILA-PEREZ, Respondent
In re Rodolfo AVILA-PEREZ, Respondent File A96 035 732 - Houston Decided February 9, 2007 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals (1) Section 201(f)(1)
More informationARBITRATION AGREEMENT ALERT-- U.S. FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS INVALIDATES ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN AT-WILL HANDBOOK, APPLYING TEXAS LAW
WRITTEN BY: J. Wilson Eaton ARBITRATION AGREEMENT ALERT-- U.S. FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS INVALIDATES ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN AT-WILL HANDBOOK, APPLYING TEXAS LAW Employers with arbitration agreements
More informationPossible Judiciary FRQs
Name: Class Period: Possible Judiciary FRQs Essay 1 Compare and contrast civil and criminal law 2 Define and discuss the principle of stare decisis 1 Name: 3 Compare and contrast original and appellate
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2014 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit
1 pr Stuckey v. United States 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term, 01 No. 1 1 pr SEAN STUCKEY, Petitioner Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
More informationStatutory Interpretation
What is the aim and why is it necessary? Statutory Interpretation Statutory Interpretation is there to help judges with general words Parliament has passed, as some words can have different meanings. Words
More informationTRADITIONAL SENTENCING FACTORS V. ELEMENTS OF AN OFFENSE: THE QUESTIONABLE VIABILITY OF ALMENDAREZ-7TORRES V. UNITED STATES
CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRADITIONAL SENTENCING FACTORS V. ELEMENTS OF AN OFFENSE: THE QUESTIONABLE VIABILITY OF ALMENDAREZ-7TORRES V. UNITED STATES In 1998, the United States Supreme Court decided the
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 529 U. S. (2000) 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
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Case: 16-12626 Date Filed: 06/17/2016 Page: 1 of 9 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS IN RE: JOSEPH ROGERS, JR., FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-12626-J Petitioner. Application for Leave to
More informationJOHNSON V. UNITED STATES AND THE FUTURE OF THE VOID-FOR- VAGUENESS DOCTRINE
JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES AND THE FUTURE OF THE VOID-FOR- VAGUENESS DOCTRINE Carissa Byrne Hessick * Last Term, in Johnson v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a portion of the Armed Career
More information