WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a federal appeals court ruling striking down portions of Alabama’s immigration law, one of the most restrictive in the nation.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last week that a defendant cannot be retried, even when his acquittal was based on a judge’s blunder, was cheered by defense attorneys.
But others say that the ruling dealt a blow to prosecutors — and to the rule of law — by rewarding a defendant who had a hand in the mistake.
Could a state trial court retroactively apply a ruling from its supreme court that abolished the diminished-capacity defense?
Lancaster v. Metrish, No. 12-547.Certiorari granted: Jan. 18, 2013. Ruling below: 683 F.3d 740 (6th Cir. 2012).
Was a state court’s retroactive application of a rule abolishing the diminished-capacity defense so unexpected that it violated a defendant’s due process rights?
A year after ruling that a woman charged under an international treaty for the allegedly poisoning of her husband’s paramour had standing to challenge the application of the law, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide the merits of the case.
WASHINGTON – In a case that raises the question of whether judges, rather than juries, can constitutionally decide factors that could trigger an increase in the minimum sentence, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court seemed reluctant to shake up a sentencing scheme that Congress and the courts have relied upon for more than a decade.
A criminal defendant bears the burden of establishing the defense that he withdrew from a drug distribution conspiracy outside the statute of limitations.
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether a sentence imposed according to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines in place at the time of sentencing, which is harsher than the sentence that would be imposed under guidelines in place at the time the crime was committed, is unconstitutional.
WASHINGTON – During oral arguments on Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court had the challenging task of determining whether the prosecution or the defense has the burden of proving at trial whether the defendant withdrew from a criminal conspiracy.
Prosecutors did not violate defendants’ rights under Brady v. Maryland by failing to turn over a letter written by a witness claiming someone other than the defendants committed a crime, a Pennsylvania appellate court has ruled.