News
Crime
- [05/21] Miss. prison riot leaves guard dead, 8 hurt
- [05/21] Trial starting for Fort Hood bomb plot suspect
- [05/21] Ex-student in webcam spy case to be sentenced
Top Headlines
- [05/21] Trial of ex-P&G, Goldman board member starts in NY
- [05/21] EU gives Google 'weeks' to ease antitrust concerns
- [05/21] Ex-student in webcam spy case to be sentenced
White Collar Crime
Case Summaries
Criminal Law & Procedure
[05/18] People v. Fulton
The trial court's denial of a motion to suppress is affirmed, where: 1) a swab taken from the defendant's penis at the county jail without a warrant was evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, as the government made no attempt to establish that the evidence would have been destroyed absent the warrantless seizure, and it was not merely a search incident to arrest; but 2) any error in admitting the evidence obtained from the defendant's penis was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt considering the credibility of the victim and the evidence obtained from the victim's underwear.
[05/17] US v. Williams
In a case in which a government agent questioned the defendant in an apartment where he was arrested without first issuing Miranda warnings, and two hours later the defendant confessed at the station house, an order of the district court suppressing the confession is reversed, where the district court erred in suppressing the confession as the product of a deliberate two-step interrogation strategy intended to undermine the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights.
[05/17] US v. Batista
In a prosecution of two individuals in connection with their membership in a narcotics trafficking ring, convictions and sentences are affirmed against numerous contentions, including: 1) as to one defendant, that a) at least one juror slept during parts of the trial, depriving the defendant of due process, b) the district court violated the Court Interpreters Act, c) the district court erred in applying sentencing enhancements, and d) the government had engaged in prosecutorial misconduct during its summation; and 2) as to the other defendant, the sentence was both procedurally and substantively unreasonable.
[05/17] Rodgers v. Marshall
The district court's denial of a petition for habeas corpus is reversed and the case remanded, where: 1) the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when the state trial court denied his timely request for representation for a new trial motion based on the erroneous notion that once waived, the right to counsel cannot be reasserted; and 2) the defendant was not required to prove prejudice, and a harmless error analysis was not required.
Sentencing
Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.
