Update from the Lexis Alert Service,
1. People v. Hinton, 304, 2530/06, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 2836; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2782, April 14, 2009, Decided, April 14, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, GOVERNMENT BENEFITS, MILITARY LAW Shinseki v. Sanders, No. 07-1209 In an application for veterans’ disability benefits, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s holding that the Department of Veterans Affairs erred in denying benefits is reversed, where the Federal Circuit’s “harmless-error” framework conflicts with 38 U.S.C. section 7261(b)(2)’s requirement that the Veterans Court take “due account of the rule of prejudicial error.”
CIVIL PROCEDURE, DISPUTE RESOLUTION & ARBITRATION, GOVERNMENT LAW, INJURY AND TORT LAW, INTERNATIONAL LAW, JUDGMENT ENFORCEMENT Ministry of Def. v. Elahi, No. 07-615 In an action seeking to attach a judgment obtained by Iran, the District Court’s order permitting the attachment is reversed, where Plaintiff could not attach the judgment because he waived his right to do so, as the U.S. paid Plaintiff as partial compensation for his judgment against Iran under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act
April 13 – April 17, 2009
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 17, 2009 US v. Vasco , No. 07-1520 Conviction and sentence for using interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in declining to issue an entrapment instruction as defendant failed to produce the requisite evidence of government inducement; 2) there sufficient evidence to support a conviction on use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire based on defendant’s conditional intent to murder his daughter; and 3) the court did not commit sentencing error.
On March 30, 2009 we posted information on this blawg about the historic agreement reached by New York lawmakers regarding reform of the Rockefeller drug law. Since that time there has been significant activity related to his effort including the signing of Chapter 56 of 2009 by the Governor on April 7, 2009. Although Chapter 56 is considered as primarily related to budget matters it contains significant material related to the Rockefeller Law reform initiatives.
For your information this posting includes links to those parts of the aforementioned legislation which appear to be relevant to the Rockefeller Drug Law reform issue. The links are to items I have posted on the New York Supreme Court Criminal Term Library Blog:
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/PLL?id=12751 for Part AAA of Chapter 56 of 2009.
April 12-18, 2009
William S. Hein & Co., Inc. is pleased to offer special pricing on a selection of our newest and best selling titles during National Library Week!
Purchase ONE title and receive 10% off
Update from the Lexis Alert Service,
April 13, 2009.
1. People v. Gagot, 277, 6919/06, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 2724; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2591, April 9, 2009, Decided, April 9, 2009, Filed, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
April 6-10, 2009:
U.S. Supreme Court, April 06, 2009 Corley v. US, No. 07-10441 Defendant’s bank robbery conviction is vacated, where the District Court erred by denying Defendant’s motion to suppress his confession under McNabb v. US, 318 U.S. 332 (1943), and Mallory v. US, 354 U.S. 449 (1957), based on the government’s delay in bringing him before a judge, where 18 U.S.C. section 3501 modified McNabb-Mallory but did not supplant it. …
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 09, 2009 US v. González-Castillo , No. 07-2134 Sentence for unlawfully entering the U.S. after being previously deported is reversed and remanded where a clear and obvious error occurred when the court based defendant’s sentence on unsupported factual assertions, such that the error affected the defendant’s substantial rights and impaired the fairness of defendant’s sentence. .
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, April 06, 2009 US v. Hertular, No. 07-1453 Conviction for drug and drug-related crimes is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and vacated and remanded where: 1) the evidence was insufficient to support defendant’s conviction for forcibly impeding or intimidating a federal officer under 18 U.S.C. sec. 111(a)(1) as the agents were not being threatened with immediate harm; 2) defendant’s sufficiency challenge to his obstruction of justice conviction was patently without merit; 3) there was no plain error in the district court’s jury instructions regarding the specific intent element of the obstruction of justice charge; and 4) although defendant’s sentence is vacated in light of the reversal of his sec. 111 conviction, there is still no merit to defendant’s procedural challenges to his sentence.
Continue reading
Update from the Lexis Alert Service,
April 9, 2009.
1. People v. Dunkley, 243, 4713/04, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 2659; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2557, April 7, 2009, Decided, April 7, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau announced today a 118-count indictment of a Chinese citizen and his company for charges relating to the misuse of Manhattan banks and the proliferation of illicit missile and nuclear technology to the Government of Iran. The Chinese company, known as LIMMT,
is a major supplier of banned weapons material to the Iranian military.
The defendants, LI FANG WEI (a/k/a KARL LEE, a/k/a PATRIC, a/k/a SUNNY BAI, a/k/a K. LEE a/k/a KL, a/k/a DAVID LI, a/k/a F.W. LI) and LIMMT ECONOMIC AND TRADE COMPANY, LTD., (a/k/a LIMMT (DALIAN FTZ)
April 8, 2009
A Service from the ABA Criminal Justice Section, http://www.abanet.org/crimjust
Corley v. United States No. 07-10441
Criminal Law Library Blog