Blog Summary
Here are my blogs to date arranged by subject matter.
Reasonable doubt at sentencing
- Booker: reasonable doubt survives
- Booker: reasonable doubt update
- Huerta-Rodriguez: reasonable doubt required
- Judge Gertner on reasonable doubt
- Okai: doctrine of constitutional avoidance requires that federal sentencing statutes be construed to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt
- Reasonable doubt advisory opinion?
- Dupas redux: reasonable doubt at sentencing is an open question
- Kandarikis: reasonable doubt, constitutional avoidance, and more
- Staten: missed issues on ex post facto and burden of proof at sentencing
- Grier: reasonable doubt at sentencing through constitutional avoidance
Sentencing appeals
- Guidelines Appeal: the presumption of reasonableness and reasonable doubt
- Zavala: trial court's treatment of guidelines as the presumptive sentence constitutes reversible error
- Guidelines Appeals: why within guidelines sentences are presumptively unreasonable
- En banc question in Carty and Zavala
Confrontation at sentencing
Shepard in general
- Shepard: where do we go from here?
- Almendarez-Torres: dead letter after Dretke v. Haley?
- Ngo & Nobrigo: two critical pieces of the post-Shepard jigsaw puzzle
Firearms crimes
- Blakely Meets FOPA: an important step in the analysis of firearms cases
- Washington: Shepard plus Booker equals no enhancement under firearms guideline
- Murillo: FOPA faux pas, or how an actual state sentence of twelve months becomes a crime punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year
- Thompson: the Fourth Circuit demonstrates the need for reinterpretation of the ACCA under the doctrine of constitutional doubt
- Weiland: ACCA statutory argument finds support in strange places
- Boothroyd: the gun bump and the safety valve
- Browning: another reason to apply the Doctrine of Constitutional Avoidance to the Armed Career Criminal Act
- Young: the Sixth Amendment, constitutional avoidance and 922(g)(8)
Immigration crimes
- Leocal Plus Booker: drug possession is not an aggravated felony
- Kwan: An approach to erroneous immigration advice in criminal cases
- Palacios-Suarez: breakthrough on "aggravated felony" and drug possession
- Post-Leocal litigation: pruning back overly-expansive definitions of "aggravated felony"
- Cert granted on simple drug possession as aggravated felony
BOP litigation
- Leocal and Martinez: an end to BOP misinterpretation of the good time statute?
- Moreland: road map to good time victory
- Castellini: BOP enjoined from terminating boot camp
- BOP Litigation update (June 10, 2005)
- Paulsen: BOP violation of the APA creates an opening for prisoners formerly disqualified from the DAP sentence reduction (June 27, 2005)
- Boot Camp Update
Minor role
Ex Post Facto
- Booker: ex post facto independent of due process
- Dupas: continued post-Booker litigation needed on Ex Post Facto Clause and reasonable doubt
Retroactivity
- Seigelbaum: first step to Blakely/Booker retroactivity
- Schardt: misreading of Schriro undermines reasonable doubt retroactivity
- Retroactivity of Apprendi and Blakely: Supreme Court review needed
- Supreme Court to determine Blakely's retroactivity
Search and seizure
Right to counsel
Guantanamo
Supreme Court review
General
Here is a link to all other defender blogs
posted by Steve Sady at 10/30/2006 09:39:00 AM
4 Comments:
Great info. Where can I find more about the Oregon Federal Public Defender's outline? The link you have doesn't seem to be working. Thank you.
The Ninth Circuit is still unable to consistently apply Rooker-Feldman. They affirmed dismissal of my wholly prospective challenge to a State state.
Facts and briefs are here: www.ninthcircuit.us.
My case is now dead - the likely only time in my life i'll need fedral intervention, they denied me. Now I just want an investigation and explanation.
Dear Mr. Sady,
Guantanamo's prison facility corrupts the primacy of justice in America, and we at Soft Skull Press admire your labors championing equity for Abd al Rashim Abdul Rassak, as well as due process others who currently languish in unwarranted incarceration. Inspired by your resolve, we would like to offer you an advance copy of Dorothea Dieckmann’s novel Guantanamo, translated from German by Tim Mohr.
Characterized by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung as “one of the best, if not the best German novels since the dawn of the new millennium,” Guantanamo neither proselytizes nor overtly indicts Camp X-Ray. Rather, Dieckmann demonstrates through the candid internal monologue of 20-year-old Rashid Bakhrani the effects of imposed physical and psychological horrors, which your efforts combat. While Badisch Zeitung predicts a niche for “this extraordinary book” alongside the works of Kafka, Levi, and Solzhenitsyn, Guantanamo presently defers the literary canon; its potential as an agent for political improvements supersedes the static nature of canonical texts. Publishers Weekly asserts that Guantanamo wields the impact of “…a kick to the head”. We hope that said power abets your struggle towards rectifying the blight called Guantanamo.
If you would like a copy of Dieckmann’s Guantanamo, please respond to publicity@softskull.com with your most suitable mailing address, and I will dispatch a copy promptly. Thank you once again for your work!
Best,
Shayne Barr
Soft Skull Press
55 Washington Street, Ste. 804
Brooklyn, NY 11201-1066
publicity@softskull.com
Can discipline costs or Client Security Funds be retroactive and if so for how long. The California Legislature amended B&P 6140.5 and 6080.10 to make discipline costs instant money judgments but were silent on retroactive application of the statutes. The California State Bar has a new "Pursuit Policy" which set ten years as the limit for now. They can contact Consumer Credit Companies and report the attorneys. If they apply their policy it may seek out estates of disciplined attorneys. They can file money judgments immediately and go after assets the disciplined attorney has. Maybe garnish wages if disciplined attorney is working? The 9th Cir. recently said the statutes were retroactive but did not set a time limit. See Gadda v. State Bar, et al., NO. 06-15344, 12/27/07.
Post a Comment
<< Home