News
[03/12]
Guard to be disciplined for Newark airport breach
[03/12]
Maine man acquitted in 'lobster wars' trial
[03/12]
Accused lottery killer indicted by Fla. grand jury
[03/12]
NYPD: Bar beating suspect in custody
[03/12]
Judge says ex-wife can testify in NJ incest case
More...
Articles
How Sentencing Works
Sentencing is a pivotal element in the criminal process. Beginning with the decision as to what type of crime a prosecutor decides to charge a suspect with, to whether or not a defendant decides to enter into a plea bargain or whether a defendant has a right to a jury trial, sentencing affects almost every aspect of criminal case. Despite its key role, however, the sentencing process remained largely unregulated until the 1970s when the United States Sentencing Commission was created to reduce racial and socio-economic disparity in the system.
More...
When Do the Police Have to Read Me My Rights?
Your "rights," otherwise known as the Miranda warnings, are a list of statements that law enforcement must recite to you before they can conduct a custodial interrogation. The Miranda warnings exist to protect your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. If you understand these rights before you talk to the police, the legal theory goes, anything you say after that will be voluntary. While the exact wording differs between jurisdictions, the warnings are essentially as follows: You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to have an attorney present. If you can’t afford an attorney, you will be provided one by the government. Anything you say can be used against you in court.
More...
|
|
Case Summaries
[03/12]
US v. McMillan
Defendant's wire and mail fraud convictions and sentences are affirmed where: 1) the superseding indictment did not broaden the charges against the defendants; 2) Cleveland's requirement that the object of the fraud be actual money or property in the hands of the victim was satisfied; 3) the district court gave an immediate curative instruction, in response to objections during the prosecutor's closing remarks, that the government bore the burden of proof and the defendants need not testify or prove anything; and 4) the district court did not clearly err by finding that defendants' business would have suffered catastrophic losses had it been closed rather then permitted to continue in operation and that the amount of loss attributable solely to the defendants could not be reasonably calculated.
[03/12]
US v. Jackson
Conviction of defendant for being a felon in possession of a firearm and sentence to 120 months' imprisonment are affirmed where: 1) the officer had a reasonable basis for believing that defendant's mother had the authority to consent to the search of his computer and the computer case; 2) district court properly concluded that the officer did not exceed the scope of the mother's consent; 3) the district court did not err in denying defendant's request to raise an "innocent possession" defense; and 4) district court appropriately rejected defendant's section 5K2.11 argument and imposed a sentence that was reasonable.
[03/12]
US v. Sykes
Conviction of defendant for being a felon in possession of a firearm and an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminla Act (ACCA) are affirmed as fleeing from police in a vehicle in violation of Ind. Code section 35-44-3-3(b)(1)(A) is sufficiently similar to ACCA's enumerated crimes in kind, as well as the degree of risk posed, and counts as a violent felony under the ACCA.
[03/12]
Gray v. Hardy
In defendant's petition for habeas relief from his conviction for first-degree murder and sentence to an extended-term based on a finding that the murder was exceptionally brutal of heinous, denial of the petition is affirmed as defendant procedurally defaulted each of his claims and even if he adequately preserved his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for federal review, he cannot show that counsel's failure to raise Apprendi error caused him prejudice.
More...
|
