Recently in Criminal Law Category

In an action alleging that the police unlawfully arrested plaintiffs during a protest, summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where the city did not have probable cause to believe that the protesters knew the protest at issue lacked a permit.  However, the order is reversed in part where: 1) the city only needed to show that the officers had reasonable grounds to believe that everyone arrested was part of the rioting group; and 2) the city could lawfully complete the mass arrest without first ordering the crowd to disperse and giving plaintiffs an opportunity to comply.

Read Carr v. Dist. of Columbia, No. 08-7083

Appellate Information

Argued September 16, 2009

Decided November 20, 2009

Judges

For Appellant:

Stacy Anderson, Peter J. Nickles, Todd S. Kim, Donna M. Murasky, Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Daniel M. Schember, Susan B. Dunham, Arthur B. Spitzer and Fritz Mulhauser, Washington, DC

In a petition for habeas review of a military court martial, dismissal of the petition is affirmed where: 1) there was no due process right to a court-martial panel of a minimum size; and 2) petitioner did not present evidence that a panel of less than six persons was likely to result in a miscarriage of justice.

Read Sanford v. US, No. 08-5402

Appellate Information

Argued September 18, 2009

Decided November 13, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Rogers

Counsel

For Appellant:

Eugene R. Fidell and Matthew S. Freedus, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Doris Coles-Huff, R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In a murder prosecution, dismissal of petitioner's habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction is reversed where, because the state court of appeals held that challenges to the effectiveness of appellate counsel could not be brought pursuant to the state collateral review statute, but were instead required to be raised through a motion to recall the mandate in that court, that statute did not deprive federal courts of jurisdiction over habeas petitions alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Read Williams v. Martinez, No. 08-5221

Appellate Information

Decided November 13, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Concurrence by Judge Brown

Counsel

For Appellant:

William Hoffman and David L. Cousineau, Washington, DC

For Appellees:

Michael T. Ambrosino and Roy W. McLeese, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

Defendant's drug possession sentence is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in imposing an obstruction of justice enhancement because defendant failed to appear at his arraignment hearing; and 2) the district court did not plainly err in concluding that defendant's acceptance of responsibility, which did not occur until after he was re-arrested for another crime, was insufficiently timely to warrant a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

Read US v. Reeves, No. 07-3130

Appellate Information

Argued September 18, 2009

Decided November 10, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Brown

Counsel

For Appellant:

Joseph R. Conte, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

April E. Fearnley, Roy W. McLeese, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

Defendant's drug and firearm sentence is affirmed where: 1) 18 U.S.C. section 3582(c)(2) permitted courts to consider only the consequences of Sentencing Guidelines changes and did not reopen other elements of a sentence; and 2) the district court acted within its discretion in denying a sentence reduction based on a Guidelines amendment.

Read US v. Lafayette, No. 08-3024

Appellate Information

Argued October 8, 2009

Decided November 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Counsel

For Appellant:

A. D. Martin, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Peter S. Smith, Roy W. McLeese III, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

In a Privacy Act action against the Bureau of Prisons concerning the loss of plaintiff-prisoner's good-time credits, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where: 1) inmate records were exempt from the relevant provisions of the Privacy Act; and 2) plaintiff's damages claim was not cognizable unless plaintiff first secured relief through a writ of habeas corpus.

Read Skinner v. US Dep't of Justice, No. 05-5284

Appellate Information

Argued September 14, 2009

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Garland

Counsel

For Appellant:

Yvonne M. Williams and Anthony F. Shelley, Washington, DC

Frank A. Skinner, pro se

For Appellees:

W. Mark Nebeker and R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

Defendant's firearm possession conviction is affirmed where defendant's voluntary statement that he was publicly drinking in violation of local law tipped the balance from providing a mere hunch to articulable suspicion of possible ongoing criminal wrongdoing, giving an officer reasonable suspicion to search him.

Read US v. Jones, No. 07-3025

Appellate Information

Argued September 14, 2009

Decided October 23, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Rogers

Counsel

For Appellant:

Dennis M. Hart, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Leslie A. Gerardo, Roy W. McLeese III and Chrisellen R. Kolb, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Washington, DC

Defendant's wire fraud conviction and sentence are affirmed, where: 1) there was ample evidence in the record from which the jury could reasonably infer that defendant was a knowing participant in the unlawful scheme to obtain the property at issue; and 2) the district court did not err in its calculation of loss.

Read US v. Brockenborrugh, No. 08-3016

Appellate Information

Argued April 9, 2009

Decided August 7, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Griffith

Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Rogers

Counsel

For Appellant:

Richard K. Gilbert, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

Florence Y. Pan, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Washington, DC

Defendant's drug distribution sentence is reversed where 18 U.S.C. section 3582(a) expressly prohibits sentencing courts from treating rehabilitation as a reason for imposing a longer term of imprisonment, and the district court committed plain error by doing so.

Read In re Sealed Case, No. 08-3029

Appellate Information

Argued March 12, 2009

Decided July 28, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Tatel

Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Henderson

Counsel

For Appellant:

Jonathan Zucker, Brooklyn, NY

For Appellee:

Nicholas P. Coleman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Washington, DC

Defendant's firearm possession sentence is vacated where 1) the law of the case doctrine precluded the district court from revisiting its determination at resentencing; and 2) the government adequately established that defendant committed the requisite predicate offenses under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) "on occasions different from one another" so as to subject defendant to the ACCA's mandatory 15-year sentence.

Read US v. Thomas, No. 07-3080

Appellate Information

Argued April 23, 2009

Decided July 21, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Henderson

Counsel

For Appellant:

SuzAnne C. Nyland, Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, DC

Jeffrey A. Taylor, United States Attorney, Washington, DC

For Appellee:

A. J. Kramer, Federal Public Defender, Washington, DC