Author: Kent Scheidegger

Bribes v. Gratuities

by · Jun 26, 2024 7:27 am

The U.S. Supreme Court issued one criminal law decision today, Snyder v. United States, No. 23-108. The Court gave a narrow construction to a federal bribery statute regarding state and local officials, distinguishing bribes from “gratuities.” In 18 U.S.C. § 201, which applies to federal officials, Congress expressly made that distinction. Subdivision (b) applies to bribes paid to induce an official act, while subdivision (c) applies to gratuities paid after the fact as a reward for an official act. This case involves 18 U.S.C. § 666, which applies to state and local officials. The Court held that § 666, as narrowed by a subsequent amendment, is more like § 201(b) and applies only to bribes, not gratuities.

In other action, the Court took a narrow view of standing and tossed out a suit challenging government-induced censorship in social media. The case is Murthy v. Missouri, No. 23-411.

Continue reading . . .

Jury Trial and Crimes on Different Occasions

by · Jun 21, 2024 1:53 pm

Today the Supreme Court decided the latest installment in the continuing saga of jury trial on sentence-determining facts. The case is Erlinger v. United States, No. 23-370.

The Armed Career Criminal Act provides for an enhanced sentence for violators with three prior violent felony convictions of crimes “committed on occasions different from one another.” So who decides if the occasions are different? No one who has followed the Apprendi line of cases will be surprised to learn that the Court held that the right of jury trial extends to this determination.

On the facts of the case, the “different occasions” element is so obvious that a jury would be able to decide it without even sitting down, yet the case goes back to convene a jury for this purpose, unless this can be considered a “harmless error.” Continue reading . . .

Arms, Abusers, and Originalism

by · Jun 21, 2024 11:17 am

Federal law prohibits persons who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms. (See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8).) Today, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a facial challenge to this law, 8-1. Only Justice Thomas dissented.

A key issue is how closely a gun-control law must track those in existence at the Founding to be considered consistent with the Second Amendment. Chief Justice Roberts, writing the opinion of the Court, states that the historical analyses of recent cases “were not meant to suggest a law trapped in amber.” Just as the protection of the amendment is not limited to the muskets of 1791, neither are the permissible regulations limited to duplicates of those in force at the time. This touches off an extensive discussion of originalism. Continue reading . . .

Supreme Court Ducks Main Issue on Crime Lab Testimony

by · Jun 21, 2024 8:00 am

Today the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its opinion in the crime lab testimony case, Smith v. Arizona, No. 22-899. Regrettably, the most important issue remains unanswered. Attorneys and lower courts still do not know if the lab notes taken by the analyst who performed the tests and related as the basis of an expert opinion by a different forensic scientist are “testimonial” so as to make the first analyst a “witness” whom the defendant has a constitutional right to confront. Continue reading . . .

What’s Left for the SCOTUS Term?

by · Jun 20, 2024 4:22 pm

Given today’s decisions, described in earlier posts, what is left for the Supreme Court to decide in the next couple of weeks before it adjourns? We have cases on homeless encampments, testimony regarding forensic lab results, firearms and domestic violence restraining orders, a political hot potato, and more. Continue reading . . .

Released Robber Robs Again the Next Day

by · Jun 18, 2024 10:53 am

On May 7, convicted robber Eric Gray was released from San Quentin. The next day he robbed a bank in Orange County, California and held three employees prisoner. He presently faces charges in federal court. The Orange County Register has this article.

The federal complaint states that “Gray has a lengthy criminal history that includes, but is not limited to, grand theft auto, robbery, sexual battery, and narcotics-related offenses. Continue reading . . .

U.S. Supreme Court Takes Wire Fraud Case

by · Jun 17, 2024 8:13 am

The U.S. Supreme Court will delve once again into the meaning of “wire fraud” in federal criminal cases. Today the Court granted certiorari in Kousisis v. United States, No. 23-909. The Question Presented as stated in the Government’s Brief in Opposition is:

Whether sufficient evidence supported petitioners’ convictions for conspiring to commit wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1349, and wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1343 and 1349, where they falsely certified compliance with a requirement that they subcontract to a disadvantaged business and, as a result, overcharged the government entity with which they contracted. Continue reading . . .