2nd Circuit Criminal Law News - U.S. Second Circuit
U.S. Second Circuit - The FindLaw 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

Recently in Criminal Law Category

New York and Connecticut gun control laws prohibiting the possession of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines do not violate the Second Amendment, the Second Circuit ruled Monday. The laws were passed following the December, 2012, school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. In the attacks, 20-year-old Adam Lanza used three semiautomatic weapons to kill 20 children and six adults, firing 156 shots in less than five minutes.

The ruling upholds the core provisions of both laws, which were some of the only gun control legislation successfully enacted after the Sandy Hook attacks.

Fernando Bermudez spent 18 years in prison for a murder he did not commit. After a prosecution which was suspect from the beginning -- one which included suggestive photo arrays, police coercion, and a failure to investigate other suspects -- it took Bermudez almost two decades to get his conviction overturned, despite every witness recanting their testimony.

Bermudez will now be able to go forward with a civil suit for damages stemming from his wrongful imprisonment, after the Second Circuit ruled on Monday that there were triable questions of fact as to whether the faulty investigation violated Bermudez's constitutional rights.

When Homeland Security agents suspected that Yuri Bershchansky was electronically transmitting child porn, they obtained a search warrant, searched his home, seized his computer and got him to confess. Unfortunately, they got the address wrong. The warrant was for Apartment 2 in Bershchansky's building, while Yuri was in Apartment 1.

Searching the wrong address, even though it housed the right man, meant that agents had exceeded the scope of the warrant and all the evidence, from computer to confession, must be suppressed, the Second Circuit ruled last week.

The Second Circuit reversed a conviction for conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine on Wednesday. James Dickerson was convicted of conspiring with a New Haven, Connecticut, drug ring from which he bought and resold drugs. The jury viewed him as part of the drug ring's conspiracy based almost solely on the volume and frequency of drug purchases and resales.

That is too tenuous of a connection to support a conspiracy conviction, the Second Circuit reasoned. Prosecutors must show more than just large, regular purchases and resales in order to show that Dickerson was part conspiring as part of the ring, rather than simply being one of its customers.

Four years after an FBI dragnet brought down her husband, Arlene Drimal's lawsuit against agents who listened in to her privileged conversations with her husband has been dismissed. According to the Second Circuit, Drimal's allegations of improper wiretapping failed to assert sufficient facts under Iqbal and Twombly.

Drimal's husband, Craig Drimal, pleaded guilty to securities fraud in connection with the collapse of the Galleon hedge fund and its founder, Raj Rajaratnam, whose insider trading landed him one of the longest white collar criminal sentences ever. The case against Mr. Drimal and Rajartnam relied heavily on wiretaps.

The Second Circuit upheld the murder, racketeering, narcotics and firearms convictions of four members of the "Courtland Avenue Crew," a violent gang from the Bronx. One defendant's convictions relied partially on evidence gathered from social media, including a rap video and photos of tattoos taken from Facebook.

That defendant, Melvin Colon, was convicted in part for the execution of Delquan Alston, who he thought was an informant. On appeal, he argued that the Facebook evidence was procured through an unconstitutional law, the Stored Communications Act, and that its use in the trial violated his First Amendment rights. The Second Circuit wasn't convinced.

Psychiatrist Couldn't Testify in Child Abuse Case, Says N.Y. Ct.

What are the limits of the doctor/patient privilege as it relates to an admission of child abuse? Can a doctor, or a psychiatrist, call the police, or children's services, if the psychiatrist suspects his client of child sexual abuse; or, indeed, if the client has admitted to it?

The answer to those questions are left unanswered by the New York Court of Appeals, but at the very least, we know that the psychiatrist can't testify at trial.

Courts cannot apply the armed career criminal sentencing minimum based on juvenile offenses, the Second Circuit ruled on Monday. Just like your childhood paper route doesn't make you a career journalist, neither can a juvenile offense be used to apply a career criminal enhancement.

The case involved Jamell Sellers, who received a statutory mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years under the Armed Career Criminal Act, in part based on his juvenile drug conviction. That conviction, in which Sellers was adjudicated as a youthful offender, can't count as one of the predicate three prior convictions needed under the ACCA, the Second Circuit found. The Second Circuit's decision to nerf the federal version of a "three strikes" law comes just as the Supreme Court considers whether the Act results in unconstitutionally excessive sentences.

Inside traders can breathe a sigh of relief today. The Second Circuit has refused to revisit a ruling which federal prosecutors had said would severely limit their ability to pursue insider trading cases.

Prosecutors had asked the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear the case of hedge fund managers Todd Newman and Anthony Chiasson. The court had reversed the pair's convictions on insider trading charges last December.

N.Y.'s Top Judge Calls for Grand Jury Reform

Following the Eric Garner and Michael Brown grand jury non-indictments, many of us wondered why grand juries are still hanging around. The Constitution requires only that the federal government use grand juries to indict criminal suspects, and yet 23 states still require the use of these bodies for serious felonies.

The problem is that grand juries are secretive (intentionally so) and not subject to the same protections as, say, preliminary hearings, like the right to counsel and the right to cross-examine witnesses. One prominent jurist wants to change that.