An Abstract prepared for the Criminal Law Library Blog by Michael Chernicoff.
The Adam Walsh Act [is] currently in place to protect children against abuse and child pornography and promote Internet safety is being used to classify criminals whose crimes were not sexual in nature as sex offenders. The Adam Walsh Act also requires information to be posted in an online sex offender registry.
A program presented by the state trial judges during the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association in San Francisco at the Marriott Marquis On August 5, from 1:30-4:30 p.m..
Attendees registered for the 2010 ABA Annual Meeting are invited to join the National Conference of State Trial Judges for an in-depth look at search and seizure of digital evidence and the Fourth Amendment implications. This program is designed to provide an understanding of the sources and types of digital evidence encountered in modern litigation, including the introduction of meta data; examine the approaches courts take to address the search and seizure of digital evidence; explore cutting-edge issues such as search and seizure considerations with cell phones, e-mails, virtual worlds, and the like; and discuss judicial management of cyber-crime cases.
The program will end with a final segment titled “Technology Tools for Judges,” that focuses on digital tools available for judges to use while dealing with electronic documents and data, and metadata, now so prevalent in the courts. Participants will learn the components of Knowledge Management systems, how security issues have been treated, and the relative merits of generic search systems vs. legalspecific systems.
A Service from the ABA Criminal Justice Section, http://www.abanet.org/crimjust
Graham v Florida No. 08–7412.
United States Supreme Court Decision: May 17, 2010
May 2010 (Vol. 5)
Excerpt from message of Chair,Charles Hynes:
The ABA Criminal Justice Section is the national entity that brings all the players in the criminal law arena together to address critical issues for the field. The focus of the Section is not only on policy development concerning those critical issues, but also on designing collaborative practical projects that help forge solutions to those systemic problems at the local and national levels. Our work on reentry and on the disparate racial impact of the criminal justice system are but two examples of how the CJS has developed cutting edge policy coupled with consequential project work. We are currently working on a project to address issues raised by the U.S. Supreme Court Padilla decision and have already developed a web resource page to assist attorneys in complying with the decision. Further, former Chair Stephen Saltzburg is forming a Task Force on Padilla which will strengthen resources to support the ability of defense lawyers to comply.
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
May 3-7, 2010
U.S. Supreme Court, May 03, 2010 Renico v. Lett, No. 09–338 In a murder prosecution, a grant of petitioner’s habeas petition is reversed where it was reasonable for the Michigan Supreme Court to determine that the trial judge had exercised sound discretion in declaring a mistrial, and thus the state court’s decision was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law under a proper application of the AEDPA’s deferential standard of review. .
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 03, 2010 US v. Guzman, No. 08-1693 Conviction and life sentence of defendant for his role in an arson that killed a mother and her infant daughter are affirmed where: 1) there was no error in the denial of defendant’s motion to suppress statements made to ATF agents; 2) there was no error in the court’s exclusion of hearsay statements offered by defendant and limits on cross-examination; 3) district court correctly found a jurisdictional nexus with interstate commerce; and 4) defendant was properly sentenced as the district court’s failure to explain the sentence was not plain error, correctly applied the sentencing guidelines and the life sentence was substantively reasonable.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 03, 2010 US v. Aranjo , No. 08-2307 Convictions of a former CEO of a federal credit union and her husband for conspiracy to embezzle and to make false entries, and other related crimes, are affirmed where: 1) the defendants’ Batson claims are rejected as district judge did not clearly err in accepting the proffered reasons with respect to the government’s peremptory challenge of an African-American juror; and 2) the husband’s remaining claims are rejected as sufficient evidence supported his convictions.
Continue reading
CRS Report No. R41222; 4/30/2010; Posted 5/7/2010 Author(s): Charles Doyle, Senior Specialist in American Public Law Subject(s): Criminal Justice; Law
No. of Pages: 9
Summary Zacarias Moussaoui, members of the Colombian drug cartels, members of organized crime, and some of the former Enron executives have at least one thing in common: they all have federal conspiracy convictions. The essence of conspiracy is an agreement of two or more persons to engage in some form of prohibited misconduct. The crime is complete upon agreement, although some statutes require prosecutors to show that at least one of the conspirators has taken some concrete step or committed some overt act in furtherance of the scheme. There are dozens of federal conspiracy statutes. One, 18 U.S.C. 371, outlaws conspiracy to commit some other federal crime. The others outlaw conspiracy to engage in various specific forms of proscribed conduct.General Section 371 conspiracies are punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years; drug trafficking, terrorist, and racketeering conspiracies all carry the same penalties as their underlying substantive offenses, and thus are punished more severely than are Section 371 conspiracies. All are subject to fines of not more than $250,000 (not more than $500,000 for organizations), most may serve as the basis for a restitution order, and some for a forfeiture order.
New publication from the American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section www.abanet.org/crimjust
The State of Criminal Justice 2010
Edited By Myrna Raeder
Non-traditional communications devices such as smartphones and game consoles pose a particular problem to law enforcement agencies trying to milk them for forensic data that reveals criminal activity, attendees were told at the 2010 Computer Forensics Show in New York City.
From: Greene, Tim. FBI: Finding Criminal Data on Cell Phones and Game Consoles:is Tough,. in Network World, April 23, 2010.
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw
April 12 -16, 2010:
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 14, 2010 US v. Cintron-Echautegui, No. 08-1800 In a conviction of defendant for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, district court’s imposition of 292-months’ imprisonment is affirmed as the court did not clearly err in making its drug quantity determination. .
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 14, 2010 US v. Mardirosian, No. 09-1144 Conviction of defendant for possessing, concealing or storing six stolen paintings, including a rare Cezanne valued at $29 million, is affirmed where: 1) the 1999 Agreement had no bearing on the “stolen” character of the paintings as the agreement was void ab initio as a contract for an illegal purpose; 2) the jury’s finding that defendant knew the paintings were stolen at some point after taking possession of them was sufficient to satisfy 18 U.S.C. section 2315’s mens rea requirement; 3) district court did not err in instructing the jury that the Agreement did not provide defendant with viable mens rea defense to the charge; and 4) district court’s use of Cezanne’s 1999 auction price in its calculation of loss was not clearly erroneous.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 15, 2010 US. v. Ellison , No. 09-1234 In a conviction of defendant for robbery and related offenses, district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress statements made to the police while being held at a county jail charged with another crime is affirmed, as there is nothing in the facts of this case that would be likely create the atmosphere of coercion subject to Miranda concern. .
Continue reading
The following is presented as a service of the ABA Criminal Justice Section http://www.abanet.org/crimjust
The ABA Section of Criminal Justice is pleased to provide Professor Rory Little’s Perspective, a Case Brief in U.S. v. Stevens which includes the Holding, Facts, and Analysis in the case.
——————————————————————————–
Criminal Law Library Blog