relevant conduct vacated

CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, SENTENCING

US v. McGowan, No. 06-1546 (7th Cir. February 28, 2007)
Sentence for distributing cocaine is vacated and remanded to the district court where the government did not meet its burden of proving that relevant conduct used to enhance defendant's sentence was part of the same course of action or common scheme or plan that gave rise to the defendant's conviction.
[To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com.] http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/061546p.pdf

Uncharged Contact

• JULIUS OBASOHAN v. U.S. ATTY. GEN.
  No. 0513332p - 02/23/07
• # JULIUS OBASOHAN v. U.S. ATTY. GEN.
  No. 0513332p - 02/23/07
  Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of Obasohan’s motion for reconsideration. The
  BIA affirmed the IJ’s determination that Obasohan’s prior conviction qualified as
  an “aggravated felony” under Section 101(a)(43)(M)(i) of the Immigration and
  Nationality Act (“INA”) (codified as 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i)) because it
  involved “fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim or victims exceed[ed]
  $10,000.” We conclude that the IJ and BIA erred by relying on conduct that was
  not charged, proven or admitted to determine that Obasohan had been convicted of
  an “aggravated felony.” The petition is therefore GRANTED.
  

Illegal Sentence

US v. Watson, No. 06-3012 (D.C. Cir. February 23, 2007)

Sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm and of possession of marijuana is reversed where the district court plainly erred in thinking the statutory maximum to which defendant could be sentenced was 20 years, when in fact it was 10 years.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/dc/063012b.pdf

FBI INFORMANT DIRTY COP

Valdes v. US, No. 03-3066 (D.C. Cir. February 09, 2007)
In case where undercover FBI informant gave cash to defendant detective as a reward for searching police databases to supply otherwise publicly available information to the informant, conviction for receiving an illegal gratuity for or because of an official act is reversed as the government failed to show that the acts for which defendant received compensation fell within the scope of 18 U.S.C. section 201(c)(1)(B) and the court's jury charge was error. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/dc/033066b.pdf

guilty plea vacated

US v. Pickett, No. 05-3179 (D.C. Cir. February 13, 2007)

Sentence based on guilty plea to distributing more than five grams of crack cocaine is vacated as to defendant's sentence where the district court erred in refusing to evaluate whether sentencing defendant in accordance with U.S.S.G. section 2D1.1, and its 100-to-1 ratio, would effectuate the purposes of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C. section 3553(a). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/dc/053179a.pdf

US Supreme Court

THE SUPREME COURT INVALIDATES CALIFORNIA'S "DETERMINATE SENTENCING" LAW: PART ONE IN A TWO-PART SERIES ON YET MORE CASES INVOLVING JUDICIAL FACTFINDING IN SENTENCING

U.S. Supreme Court decision invalidating California's "determinate sentencing" law. Amar explains in detail each of the crucial Supreme Court Sixth Amendment sentencing precedents that led to the decision -- each deriving from the key principle that juries, not judges, must find (beyond a reasonable doubt) the facts that determine the length of the sentence imposed in a criminal case. http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/amar/20070202.html Opinionhttp://laws.findlaw.com/us/000/05-6551.html