Criminal News Headlines

Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure

[09/05] Smiley v. Thurmer
In a first-degree murder case, grant of a petition for habeas relief is affirmed where: 1) the police who arrested petitioner failed to give proper Miranda warnings; and 2) admission of statements made after the failure to Mirandize was prejudicial to petitioner.

[09/05] US v. Allday
Sentence for receiving sexually explicit images of minors is affirmed over objections that the district court impermissibly applied a presumption of reasonableness to the sentencing range calculated under the guidelines.

[09/05] Carvajal v. Dominguez
In a suit alleging constitutional violations by a DEA officer in connection with the criminal prosecution of plaintiff for money laundering, denial of summary judgment for defendant on one of four claims is reversed where: 1) the denial of defendant's claim of qualified immunity was an appealable collateral order; and 2) defendant committed no Brady violation and was therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

[09/05] US v. Reyes
Convictions for conspiracy, bank robbery, and a handgun crime are affirmed where: 1) evidence of prior bank robberies in which defendant had participated was erroneously admitted, but the error was harmless; 2) limitations on defendant's cross-examination of a government witness did not violate the Confrontation Clause; and 3) a motion for new trial on the basis of newly-discovered evidence was properly denied where the new evidence proffered would not have affected the verdict.

Read More

Asset Forfeiture

[08/14] Santiago-Lugo v. US
In a claim by plaintiff for return of seized but not forfeited property as barred by the statute of limitations, government's motion for summary affirmance is granted where: 1) the six-year limitations period under 28 U.S.C. section 2401(a) applies to Rule 41(g) claims; and 2) in circumstances where there has been a related criminal proceeding but no civil forfeiture proceeding, the cause of action accrues at the end of the criminal proceeding.

[08/06] US v. $125,938.62
In a civil forfeiture action under the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA), court's order of forfeiture is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the government met its burden of proving that two of the certificates of deposit were subject to forfeiture because they were derived from funds stolen from the Nicaraguan treasury; but 2) with respect to five other certificates, the government failed to meet its burden to present evidence of a connection between those funds and funds stolen from the Nicaraguan treasury.

[07/31] US v. $291, 828.00 in US Currency
In an in rem civil forfeiture proceeding brought pursuant to 21 U.S.C. section 881(a)(7) against money, jewelry and electronic equipment seized from claimant's home, rulings in favor of government and an order of forfeiture are affirmed where: 1) exigent circumstances existed; and 2) evidence obtained after the search warrant was admissible.

[07/28] US v. $92,300 in US Currency
Summary judgment ordering the forfeiture of currency allegedly found on claimant and in his vehicle is reversed where: 1) the government's evidence supporting its motion consisted of an affidavit containing hearsay evidence; and 2) legislative changes increasing the government's burden in civil forfeiture cases to a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard also required that hearsay no longer be admissible in forfeiture proceedings.

Read More

Sentencing

[09/05] US v. Ault
In a case challenging enhanced sentencing based on misdemeanors in which defendant was unrepresented, the sentence imposed is affirmed as not violating the Sixth Amendment right to counsel where: 1) two of the four misdemeanors considered did not include incarceration; and 2) plaintiff waived counsel in the remaining two misdemeanor matters.

[09/05] US v. Allday
Sentence for receiving sexually explicit images of minors is affirmed over objections that the district court impermissibly applied a presumption of reasonableness to the sentencing range calculated under the guidelines.

[09/04] Jones v. State of Florida
In a capital-murder case, denial of postconviction relief is affirmed and petition for writ of habeas corpus denied over claims of error regarding: 1) Brady and Giglio violations by prosecutors; 2) counsel's failure to present mitigation evidence during the penalty phase; 3) summary denial of two additional ineffective assistance of counsel claims; 4) the constitutionality of Florida's capital sentencing scheme; 5) improper burden-shifting during the penalty phase; and 6) the advisory nature of the penalty phase jury verdict.

[09/04] People v. Castagne
In a conviction for unlawfully possessing methamphetamine, sentence finding defendant ineligible for probation is reversed where: 1) record does not establish that defendant's acts and omissions evinced a complete refusal to undergo treatment; and 2) facts in the present case are subject to conflicting inferences and the lower court never considered the question whether defendant demonstrated a complete refusal to undergo drug treatment.

Read More