Author: Kent Scheidegger

Supreme Court Narrowly Interprets Mandatory Consecutive Sentencing Statute

by · Jun 16, 2023 10:25 am

Most of the time, when a defendant receives more than one sentence in a single case the judge has discretion to run the sentences consecutively or concurrently. Concurrent sentences, in effect, eliminate the shorter sentence(s); the defendant will do the time for the longest-sentence crime and will not do a single day in prison more for committing the additional crime(s). Cheaper by the dozen.

Legislatures can mandate consecutive sentences in particular circumstances, though. One such mandate is found in the very long and very confusing federal firearm crime sentencing statute, 18 U.S.C. § 924. The U.S. Supreme Court tends to interpret limits on judicial discretion narrowly, especially in sentencing. Today it gave the limit in §924(c) the narrower of two possible interpretations. No surprise there. The decision in Lora v. United States, No. 22-49, was unanimous. Continue reading . . .

No, Defendant Does Not Get Off Scot-Free for a Technical Error

by · Jun 15, 2023 7:28 am

This post on March 16 discussed the Supreme Court case of Smith v. United States, No. 21-1576. Smith had been tried in the wrong district, and his conviction was reversed on appeal. He claimed that the venue was an element of the offense, such that the Double Jeopardy Clause precluded his retrial in the correct district.

I wrote then, “When this case first came up, I thought the claim to be so obviously wrong that there was no chance the Court would buy it. I still think so.”

Sure enough, the high court today decided that Smith can be retried. Unanimously. Continue reading . . .

LA DA Fails to Boot Victim’s Advocate Out of Court

by · Jun 12, 2023 11:03 am

Our system of criminal justice is an adversary one, normally pitting the prosecutor against the defense lawyer. In Los Angeles today, however, the office of District Attorney George Gascón is often agreeing with the defendant.

While there are only two parties to a criminal case, victims of crime in California have a right to be heard under Article I § 28 of the state Constitution, as amended in the original Marsy’s Law, Proposition 9 of 2008. Retired Deputy District Attorney Kathleen Cady has been doing great work in LA toward ensuring that victims’ voices are heard. This raises the ire of Mr. Gascón, interfering with his cozy, collusive motions. Continue reading . . .

SCOTUS Monday

by · Jun 12, 2023 7:58 am

It’s an uneventful Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court. The court issued an orders list but did not take up any cases for full briefing and argument. There are no summary decisions or dissents from denial of certiorari.

We are still waiting on two decisions from the present term: Jones v. Hendrix, No. 21-857, on successive collateral attacks by federal prisoners and Counterman v. Colorado, No. 22-138, on stalking laws and “true threats.”

Decisions are expected on Thursday and Friday this week.

Continue reading . . .

U.S. Supreme Court Curbs Overbroad Use of Identity Theft Law

by · Jun 8, 2023 8:04 am

Congress established a sentence enhancement for “aggravated identity theft,” 18 U. S. C. §1028A(a)(1), when one “knowingly transfers, possesses, or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person” in the course of committing certain other crimes. This broad language can include a wide variety of misuses that would not even remotely come within what most people would regard as identity theft.

Today, the Supreme Court decided the case of Dubin v. United States, No. 22-10. Dubin’s actual crime was a rather mundane case of Medicaid fraud, disturbingly common but not unusual. He charged the government for testing by a licensed psychologist when the test was actually done by an associate and should have been paid at a lower rate. In the process of bilking this important government program, he necessarily used the patient’s Medicaid reimbursement number. He was not claiming to be someone he wasn’t. Is this “aggravated identity theft”? Continue reading . . .

Homelessness and Crime in California

by · May 31, 2023 10:15 am

The City Journal has a special issue titled Can California Be Golden Again? The issue describes, as Michael Shellenberger puts it, how “ruinous policies have transformed California from a symbol of progress to a cautionary tale for the nation.”  Stephen Eide has an article titled The Encampment State on homelessness, a problem that is now far worse in California than in earlier times, bad as those were, and far worse than it is at present in other regions of the country with better functioning governments. Continue reading . . .

The Last Full Measure of Devotion

by · May 29, 2023 10:32 am

“We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate. . .we cannot consecrate. . . we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.

It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us. . .that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion. . . that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain. . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. . . and that government of the people. . .by the people. . .for the people. . . shall not perish from the earth. ”

— Abraham Lincoln, 1863

SCOTUS Thursday

by · May 25, 2023 7:19 am

The U.S. Supreme Court has been issuing opinions only on Thursdays this month, with only orders lists on Mondays. That is a departure from past practice. The court issued three opinions today. It was a good day for landowners and homeowners, but no criminal cases.  One law-enforcement-related civil case was decided, but the issue was purely one of civil procedure. Continue reading . . .