Supreme Court passes on Alabama immigration case 
Published: April 30, 2013
Tags: Criminal Law, Employment Law, immigration, preemption, U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Double jeopardy ruling a blow to prosecutors
By:
Kimberly Atkins
Published: February 28, 2013
Tags: Criminal Law, double jeopardy, invited error, U.S. Supreme Court, wrongful acquittal
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.
CRIMINAL LAW
Published: January 22, 2013
Tags: Criminal Law, diminished capacity, habeas corpus, retroactivity
Could a state trial court retroactively apply a ruling from its supreme court that abolished the diminished-capacity defense?
See “Can state retroactively abolish diminished-capacity defense?”
Lancaster v. Metrish, No. 12-547.Certiorari granted: Jan. 18, 2013. Ruling below: 683 F.3d 740 (6th Cir. 2012).
Can state retroactively abolish defense?
Published: January 21, 2013
Tags: Criminal Law, diminished capacity, habeas corpus, retroactivity
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?
Supreme Court again takes up case of poisoned paramour
Published: January 20, 2013
Tags: Congress, Criminal Law, international law, Tenth Amendment, U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Supreme Court takes up sentencing factors case
By:
Kimberly Atkins
Published: January 14, 2013
Tags: Apprendi v. New Jersey, Criminal Law, judicial discretion, jury trial, Sixth Amendment, U.S.
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.
CRIMINAL LAW
Published: January 9, 2013
Tags: conspiracy, Criminal Law, statute of limitations, U.S. Supreme Court
A criminal defendant bears the burden of establishing the defense that he withdrew from a drug distribution conspiracy outside the statute of limitations.
See “Drug defendant must show withdrawal from conspiracy”
U.S. Supreme Court. Smith v. U.S., No.
» Continue Reading.
Court takes up ex post facto sentencing case
Published: November 9, 2012
Tags: Criminal Law, ex post facto, sentencing guidelines, U.S. Supreme Court
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.
Justices ponder who bears burden in conspiracy case
By:
Kimberly Atkins
Published: November 6, 2012
Tags: affirmative defense, burden of proof, conspiracy, Criminal Law, U.S. Supreme Court
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.
No Brady violation for failing to disclose witness letter
Published: October 31, 2012
Tags: Brady violation, Criminal Law, exculpatory evidence
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.
