Criminal Legal News Headlines

News

Crime

[07/02] Hollywood murder case in hands of California jury
[07/02] 1 dead, 4 hurt in SoCal dental office shooting
[07/02] Pa. man gets prison over forest oil tank vandalism
[07/02] Families visit prison from comfort of their homes
[07/02] Flight diverted after passenger undresses in seat
[07/01] NJ man on 15th drunken-driving offense: I'm guilty
[07/01] Bail denied for LA gang member turned activist
[07/01] NYPD: High-profile buildings need tighter security

More...

White Collar Crime

[07/01] Judge revokes bond for Texas financier Stanford
[06/30] AP Source: 10 others to be charged in Madoff probe
[06/30] Attorneys await decision on Stanford's bond
[06/30] SEC wants financier's assets frozen before trial
[06/25] Indicted billionaire Stanford taken to courthouse
[06/23] Accused spam scammer pleads guilty in Detroit
[06/23] Madoff lawyer seeks 12-year sentence for client
[06/23] AP source: Indicted billionaire headed to Texas

More...

Case Summaries

Asset Forfeiture

[06/23] Transportes Navieros y Terrestres S.A. v. Fairmount Heavy Transport N.V.
District court order granting defendant's motion to reduce the amount held by maritime attachment pursuant to the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions is affirmed where defendant demonstrated good cause to reduce the amount of the attachment, and the district court properly exercised its discretion in drawing the preliminary conclusion that plaintiff was likely to recover only the costs it incurred in securing the release of the Vessel and in thus reducing the amount of the attachment.

[05/29] People v. Ten Thousand One Hundred Fifty Three Dollars and Thirty Eight Cents
Trial court judgment for plaintiff in connection with forfeiture proceedings related to $10,153.38 seized by the LAPD at the time of arrest is reversed and remanded where the forfeiture action was not tried in conjunction with the underlying criminal offense as required by Health and Safety Code sec. 11488.4 (i)(3).

[05/27] Thompson v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.
In an action involving seized assets related to a bankruptcy proceeding, district court judgment is reversed where: 1) defendant exercised control over property belonging to plaintiff's bankruptcy estate when it held onto the vehicle and refused to return it to the estate upon request, in violation of Bankruptcy Code sec. 362(a)(3); and 2) defendant must relinquish possession of the vehicle as a creditor is required to immediately return a seized asset in which a debtor has an equity interest to the debtor's estate upon his filing of Chapter 13 bankruptcy, and then it can seek adequate protection of its interests in bankruptcy court.

[05/27] US v. Hoffman-Vaile
Defendant's conviction and sentence for obstruction of justice are affirmed in part, where 18 U.S.C. section 1519 governed Defendant's alteration of records sought by a grand jury because the proceedings related to a Medicare fraud investigation; but reversed in part, where the District Court miscalculated the amount of the forfeiture judgment.

[04/29] US v. Saccoccia
District court grant of motion by the government to forfeit substitute assets belong to defendant that were already in the government's possession but had not been specifically named in any prior forfeiture order is affirmed where: 1) defendant had no constitutional right to appointed counsel under the Fifth or Sixth Amendment to defend against the government's attempt to forfeit the substitute assets; 2) the property in question may be forfeited as substitute property under 18 U.S.C. sec. 1963(m) as it was not yet forfeited and there was still an unfulfilled judgment against defendant; and 3) there is no constitutional right in criminal forfeiture proceedings that factual predicates for a substitute asset forfeiture be found by a jury and not by a court.

[04/08] Illinois Inv. Trust No. 92- 7163 v. Am. Grading Co.
In an action involving the assignment of rights to a landfill after a bankruptcy, district court's judgment is affirmed where: 1) the failure of third party RTC to pay the advance royalty was a material breach that justified defendant's invocation of the termination provisions of the lease; and 2) the terminated lease between defendant and third party RTC means that the rights to the landfill are not available to any of RTC's creditors, and thus plaintiff-creditor cannot obtain the lease by assignment.

[03/31] For Your Ease Only, Inc. v. Calgon Carbon Corp.
In an action involving judgment enforcement and the transfer of assets brought under the Illinois Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, district court order is vacated where the transfer of the defendant-company's assets by defendant Schneider to a company owned by Fournier is voidable under the UFTA as the transfer was not accepted in good faith. Case is remanded to the district court to decide whether co-defendant HSN violated the third party citation order by transferring the assets of defendant Schnieder's entities to Fournier's company.

[03/25] US v. Kaloti Wholesale, Inc.
In a civil forfeiture suit, district court's judgment is affirmed where court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to allow the sale of the seized baby formula, as there was a concern over the safety of the formula and even a very slight danger was reason enough to bar the sale.

More...

Criminal Law & Procedure

[07/02] US v. Pepper
Sentence for drug crimes is affirmed where: 1) this court's prior remand did not require the district court to grant defendant a 40 percent downward departure for substantial assistance as the remand was a general remand for resentencing and did not place any limitations on the discretion of the district court judge in resentencing; 2) the court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to grant more than a 20 percent reduction based on defendant's substantial assistance; 3) the court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's request for a downward variance based on his post-sentencing rehabilitation and the cost of his incarceration; and 4) defendant's sentence was not unreasonable.

[07/02] US v. Davis
Conviction for firearms possession is affirmed where: 1) the search of defendant's vehicle without a warrant was permissible under the Fourth Amendment as it was lawful search incident to arrest, and thus firearm found in vehicle was admissible; and 2) the court properly ruled that the search was permissible under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement as well.

[07/02] US v. Schmidt
Conviction and sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition is affirmed where: 1) the district court had jurisdiction over the offense as defendant's possession of a firearm manufactured out of country and ammunition manufactured out of state was sufficient to satisfy 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(g)(1)'s required nexus to interstate commerce; and 2) defendant's sentence was not unreasonable.

[07/02] US v. Lee
Sentence for aiding and abetting assault with intent to rob a post office is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in overruling defendant's objections to the sentencing enhancements without requiring the government to present any evidence as there was sufficient evidence in the record to support each of the enhancements; and 2) the court did not err in imposing an enhancement under Guidelines sec. 2B3.1(b)(4)(B), as one of his accomplices struck a woman attempting to leave the post office during the robbery, thereby physically restraining the victim.

[07/02] Roubideaux v. North Dakota Dep't of Corr. and Rehabilitation
In a sex discrimination action brought by female prison inmates, district court grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the female inmates had standing to challenge the constitutionality of the two challenged gender-explicit statutes; 2) the evidence in the record raises no inference of gender discrimination in the decision-making process because the statutes in question substantially relate to the important government objective of providing adequate segregated housing for female inmates, and any equal protection claim arising out the inmates' previous housing was mooted by their transfer to the Correction and Rehabilitation Center; 3) prison industry assignments were not subject to Title IX as the primary purpose of the program is employment, not education; and 4) the vocational education programs were within the scope of Title IX, and the district court did not err in finding that any differences in the programs offered men and women were a function of the location of the facilities and not gender discrimination.

[07/02] People v. Nguyen
Court of Appeals judgment is reversed where the absence of a constitutional or statutory right to jury trial under the juvenile law does not, under Apprendi, preclude the use of a prior juvenile adjudication of criminal misconduct to enhance the maximum sentence for a subsequent adult felony offense by the same person under California's Three Strikes law.

[07/02] People v. Farley
Conviction for first degree murder and other crimes and sentence to death is affirmed where: 1) the trial court did not err in denying defendant's motions for a change of venue and in its rulings on various challenges to the makeup of the jury; 2) the court did not err in denying several motions to suppress and in its evidentiary rulings, in various instructions it made to the jury, and in denying requested defense instructions; 3) the court did not err denying defendant access to data concerning his past employment and in prohibiting him from introducing evidence on that subject, and did not err in refusing to give proposed instructions on aggravating and mitigating circumstances; and 4) there is no merit to defendant's argument that the death penalty statute violates the United States Constitution.

[07/02] US v. McGraw
Conviction for drug possession is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress and finding that defendant voluntarily consented to the officers' search; and 2) the merits of defendant's challenge to his sentencing classification cannot be reached as defendant's plea agreement included an unambiguous waiver of his right to challenge the district court's sentencing determinations.

More...

Sentencing

[07/02] US v. Pearson
Sentence for producing, transporting, receiving, and possessing child pornography is vacated and remanded further sentencing proceedings where a restitution order pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 2259 may include an amount for estimated future medical expenses, but the district court did not explain adequately its calculation of the restitution amount in the order. The district court's judgment of conviction is affirmed in all other respects.

[07/01] US v. Myers
Conviction and sentence for attempted arson is affirmed where: 1) even if the government erred and made improper statements at closing, defendant was not prejudiced by the statements, and thus he failed to show a violation of his right to a fair trial or a Confrontation Clause violation; 2) no error occurred at sentencing and remand is unnecessary as the court considered the guidelines range to be advisory, took into account defendant's apparent change in behavior and job history, and imposed a sentence below the guidelines range; and 3) the court properly considered defendant's acquitted conduct during sentencing as those actions had been proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

[07/01] US v. Moran
In a firearm possession prosecution, the District Court's order setting the terms of Defendant's supervised release is affirmed where a defendant is not entitled to notice before a District Court may impose special conditions of supervised release to address a defendant's proclivity to sexual misconduct when the crime of conviction did not involve sexual activity.

More...