Firm News

Case Summaries

Criminal Law & Procedure

[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.

[05/17] US v. David
In a prosecution that resulted in a conviction for conspiring to possess and possessing with intent to distribute a controlled substance, and of conspiring to import and importing a controlled substance, the case is remanded for resentencing so that the district court can reevaluate the various considerations identified by the United States Sentencing Guidelines, including, as appropriate, the nature, chemical structure, and intended neurological effects of the substance contained in the pills at issue, and to thereby determine the most closely related substance referenced in the Guidelines and the appropriate marijuana equivalency of the mixture.

Read More

Evidence

[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] Rolan v. Coleman
The district court's denial of a petition for habeas corpus is affirmed, where: 1) certain statements by the prosecutor did not constitute a denial of due process; 2) the prosecutor's comments about the defendant's post-arrest silence did not violate his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination; and 3) the trial court's decision to admit a deceased witness's testimony from the defendant's original trial did not violate the defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause by depriving him of an adequate cross-examination of the witness.

[05/16] US v. Cervantes
In a case in which police surveilled the defendant's car, stopped him for a traffic violation, and impounded and searched the car without a warrant, the district court's denial of a motion to suppress cocaine found in the car is reversed, where neither the automobile exception not the community caretaking exception to the warrant requirement applied.

[05/16] Asociacion de Periodistas de Puerto Rico v. Mueller
In a suit by several journalists against FBI agents, who the journalists alleged used excessive force against them during the execution of a search warrant, summary judgment to the defendants is affirmed, where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting discovery and relying on defendants' depositions; 2) videos were properly authenticated, and the Best Evidence Rule was satisfied; 3) the defendant agents were entitled to qualified immunity; and 4) the plaintiffs were not entitled to an injunction.

Read More

Sentencing

Read More