Sentences with phrase «federal sentencing issues»

A lot of worrisome «smaller» federal sentencing issues that could benefit most from congressional oversight and legislative reform — the application of the Armed Career Criminal Act, child porn victim restitution awards, fast - track departures, the persistent growth of the federal criminal docket — did not even get mentioned.

Though Rita has something for everyone (and, arguably, nothing for everyone) focused on federal sentencing issues, it has very little for folks deeply interested in figuring the deeper views of particular Justices.

June 28, 2011)(available for download below), covers a number of modern federal sentencing issues and reviews a remarkable procedural history for a single low - level drug defendant.

Not exact matches

U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto issued the ruling Monday, saying it did not matter that investors eventually came out ahead since the amount of loss plays a significant role in federal sentencing guidelines.

While his Democratic predecessor Eric Holder told federal prosecutors to avoid seeking long mandatory minimum sentences when charging some lower - level drug offenders, for example, Sessions issued an order demanding the opposite, telling them to pursue the most serious charges possible against most suspects.

The sentencing marks the end of one of the first trials of its kind, bringing issues surrounding tools of anonymity including the digital currency Bitcoin and anonymous browser Tor into a federal court room.

In fact, the guidance issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) included this sentence, removing any doubt about whether the federal government was signaling that this activity can be conducted: «This FinCEN guidance clarifies how financial institutions can provide services to marijuana - related businesses consistent with their BSA obligations.»

As he did in the wake of former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's sentencing, Gov. Andrew Cuomo issued a brief statement in response to the five year sentence handed down by a federal judge in the corruption case of ex-Majority Leader Dean Skelos.

He is also supported by State Senator Gustavo Rivera — a reformer who ousted Bronx legend Pedro Espada, recently sentenced to federal prison for stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from a non-profit he controlled ---- and Borough President Ruben Diaz, Jr., the scion of another Bronx dynasty who parts ways with his infamous father on gay rights issues.

In New York City, without a public schedule, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, whose administration was hit with a subpoena last week on the Buffalo Billion investigation from the same federal prosecutor who got the Silver conviction, issued a brief written statement saying that the Silver sentence sends «a simple message that officials who abuse the public's trust will be held accountable.»

On Monday, Judge Kimba M. Wood of Federal District Court issued an order rescheduling Mr. Skelos's sentencing for 10 a.m. on April 13.

Moments before Federal Court Judge Cathy Siebel issued his sentence, St. Lawrence offered an apology to Rockland County for the crimes he committed, saying he was «deeply sorry.»

The judge, Valerie E. Caproni of Federal District Court, did not unseal the materials at the time, but the issue arose again after the trial ended, when the office of Preet Bharara, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, asked to be allowed to use the materials at Mr. Silver's sentencing, which is scheduled for May 3.

Gertner says judges are too often silent on issues they should publicly address, such as how federal sentencing guidelines have led to what she and other jurists consider unreasonably long prison terms for nonviolent drug offenders.

The case is Dillon v. United States, and at issue is the question of whether the federal sentencing guidelines are binding or only advisory when defendants who were originally sentenced before the decision in United States v. Booker are resentenced pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582 (c)(2), after the guidelines applicable to the offense in question are changed.

Rather than bemoan reactions to the border agent cases, I want to issue a challenge to leaders in Congress: Will anyone in the House or Senate have the courage to use the border agent case as an opportunity to discuss and move forward with needed federal sentencing reforms?

However, a court may reduce (modify) to include any of the requirements relating to probation and community control, a legal sentence imposed by it within 60 days of its imposition; after the receipt by the court of a mandate issued by the appellate court upon affirmance of the judgment and / or sentence upon an original appeal; after receipt by the court of a certified copy of an order of the appellate court dismissing an original appeal from the judgment and / or sentence; or if further appellate review is sought in a higher court or in successively higher courts, after the highest state or federal court to which a timely appeal has been taken under authority of law, or when a petition for certiorari has been timely filed under authority of law, has written an order of affirmance or an order dismissing the appeal and / or denying certiorari.

I am pleased to report that, just in time for the start of the summer sentencing season, the latest issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter focused on white - collar cases is now in print and also available here sentencing season, the latest issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter focused on white - collar cases is now in print and also available here Sentencing Reporter focused on white - collar cases is now in print and also available here on - line.

In the U.S., a criminal defendant can not raise the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel on a direct appeal of a conviction or sentence, but can raise it in a collateral attack on a conviction which must be brought first in the state court and if that remedy is exhausted, may then be brought in federal court.

As I long ago discussed here and here, this is practically a very important issue that needs to settled in order to have a uniform and consistent federal sentencing system.

Among many virtues of SCOTUS attention to post-Booker issues is the spotlight it can bring on particularly ugly features of the federal sentencing system.

If an issue affects a right protected by the United States Constitution, or some other federal law (death sentence cases), it can be appealed from the state supreme court to the United States Supreme Court.

Moreover, criminal justice issues — not just sentencing, but also search and trial and habeas issues — comprise roughly 1/3 of the SCOTUS docket and this is the bread + butter of the work of federal district courts.

Beyond the attempted extortion of University of Louisville men's basketball coach Rick Pitino, which led to a seven - year sentence for Sypher, the case provides the LBW practice tip of the day: When briefing a legal issue in federal court, do not simply copy your statement of the law from a page on Wikipedia.

A second issue raised in the petition was whether a federal court may decline to address an argument that a shorter sentence is needed to avoid sentence disparities.

The latest issue of the journal Federal Probation, which is published by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, features a special section looking at «30 Years with Federal Sentencing Guidelines.»

Because when your client's legal issue involves the federal government and immigration and national security in the same sentence, it is reasonable to assume the federal government's considerable surveillance powers are focused on you.

Thus, the real severability issue in Booker and Fanfan is apparently not whether some aspects of the federal sentencing system is severability, but rather only which aspects are severable.

After many brief - related posts on the applicability of Blakely to the federal sentencing guidelines (see, e.g., posts here and here and here; see also Hammoud post here), this weekend I am starting to focus on the Booker and Fanfan briefs» approach to the even tougher issue of severability.

I have finally put the finishing touches on the Federal Sentencing Reporter's latest issue, which is entitled «The Booker Aftershock.»

This important issue has been stuck in a political stalemate for over a decade; the stalemate has now been (partially) broken at an especially interesting moment in the evolution of the federal sentencing system.

This issue (Volume 18, No. 5) is entitled «Toward Real Reform: The Constitution Project Recommendations; Model Federal Sentencing Guidelines.»

I am pleased to report that another Federal Sentencing Reporter issue is off to press.

The heart of the Issue is an ambitous project engineered by FSR editor Frank Bowman to develop a set of Model Sentencing Guidelines for the federal system.

Also, the Federal Sentencing Reporter can be ordered here and past issues can be accessed electronically here.

(This piece is slated for publication in the October 2004 issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter, which will be FSR's second rapid - fire special Blakely issue.

In producing this Issue, our goal has been to provide an overview of the current state of American sentencing and to present a variety of perspectives on the issues that Congress will likely have to consider in order to reshape the Federal Sentencing Gsentencing and to present a variety of perspectives on the issues that Congress will likely have to consider in order to reshape the Federal Sentencing GSentencing Guidelines.

We offer this Issue in the hope that Congress will look seriously at revising the federal system in light of Blakely and Booker and that, in the spirit of the SRA, Congress will want to draw on contemporary expertise and the evolving «intellectual history» of sentencing knowledge in further reforming the federal sentencing system.

The main issue is one that affects all federal sentencing appeals: how much deference should be given to district - court sentencing decisions, particularly for outside - the - Guidelines sentences?

The chapters in this Issue address the various purposes of sentencing, the special role of federal criminal justice in our federal system, the institutions and actors at the rulemaking and adjudicative stages (including Congress, the Commission, trial and appellate judges, and advocates), and the basic substantive and structural elements of sentencing systems.

The opening commentary to this FSR issue, which I co-authored with Steve Chanenson, is entitled «Federal Cocaine Sentencing in Transition» and can be downloaded below.

Whatever one thinks about the Court's purported moves to the right on other issues, in the arena of criminal sentencing, federal defendants certainly should be more hopeful arguing before the current Justices than before any other group of appellate judges.

September 23, 2016 in Data on sentencing, Detailed sentencing data, Drug Offense Sentencing, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Marijuana Legalization in the States, Pot Prohibition Issues, Who sentencing, Detailed sentencing data, Drug Offense Sentencing, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Marijuana Legalization in the States, Pot Prohibition Issues, Who sentencing data, Drug Offense Sentencing, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Marijuana Legalization in the States, Pot Prohibition Issues, Who Sentencing, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Marijuana Legalization in the States, Pot Prohibition Issues, Who Sentencing Guidelines, Marijuana Legalization in the States, Pot Prohibition Issues, Who Sentences?

The opinion's first footnote indicates that a majority of circuit courts embraced a broader view of the federal forfeiture statute, which in turns further reinforces my long - standing view that SCOTUS these days is generally more pro-defendant on a wide range of sentencing issues than most lower federal courts.

November 19, 2013 in Booker in district courts, Data on sentencing, Detailed sentencing data, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Gun policy and sentencing, Offender Characteristics, Offense Characteristics, Second Amendment issues Permalink Comments (3)sentencing, Detailed sentencing data, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Gun policy and sentencing, Offender Characteristics, Offense Characteristics, Second Amendment issues Permalink Comments (3)sentencing data, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Gun policy and sentencing, Offender Characteristics, Offense Characteristics, Second Amendment issues Permalink Comments (3)Sentencing Guidelines, Gun policy and sentencing, Offender Characteristics, Offense Characteristics, Second Amendment issues Permalink Comments (3)sentencing, Offender Characteristics, Offense Characteristics, Second Amendment issues Permalink Comments (3) TrackBack

As detailed in this new Reason piece, headlined «Ross Ulbricht Files Appeal to the Supreme Court on His Life Sentence Without Parole: Silk Road founder's appeal stresses the dangerous Fourth and Sixth Amendment implications of his prosecution and sentencing,» a notable federal criminal defendant is bringing some notable issues to the Supreme Court via a new cert petition.

Mandatory sentencing laws can be differentiated from other state and territory laws that a federal government may not like, as they involve fundamental issues of compliance - of Australia - with human rights obligations.