Category: Appeal

Getting Off Scot Free for a Technical Error?

by · Mar 16, 2023 10:49 am

Paul Larkin and Cully Stimson have this article in the Federalist Society Review previewing the case of Smith v. United States, No. 21-1576, set for argument in the Supreme Court Tuesday, March 28.

Smith was tried in the wrong district, so the Eleventh Circuit reversed his conviction and granted him a new trial in the correct district. He claims that’s not enough; he should get off completely. Larkin and Stimson explain why that is not the law. Continue reading . . .

Supreme Court Decides Two Change-in-Law Questions

by · Jun 14, 2021 8:00 am

The Supreme Court decided two cases today dealing with how to address existing cases when the law changes. Greer v. United States, No. 19-8709, addresses the situation where the defense lawyer does not object at trial, because the law seems settled at the time, but the Supreme Court later decides to the contrary. Terry v. United States, No. 20-5904, addresses which inmates convicted prior to the First Step Act can get their sentences for crack cocaine offenses reduced. Continue reading . . .

California Supreme Court Hears Argument Challenging Death Penalty Law

by · Jun 2, 2021 11:55 am

The California Supreme Court heard oral argument today in People v. McDaniel.  Donte McDaniel was convicted in 2009 of two brutal murders and attempted murder on two others.  In 2004, McDaniel and his accomplice entered a woman’s Los Angeles apartment looking for a man who had stolen drugs from another member of the gang he belongs to, the Bounty Hunter Bloods (BHB). McDaniel began firing as he walked in the door, shooting and killing the woman, then shooting the man he was looking for  so may times in the head that his face collapsed.  He shot two other women in the apartment, not involved in the drug dispute, critically injuring them both and leaving them permanently disabled.

Continue reading . . .

Appellate Judges on Remote Arguments

by · Feb 4, 2021 10:30 am

Marcia Coyle has this article in the National Law Journal (free registration required), titled Appellate Judges, Including Justice Breyer, Reflect on Remote Arguments in Virus Era.

In the pandemic era of remote oral arguments, audio is good, but audio-visual is better, although both come with a significant cost of reduced or eliminated eye contact, federal and state appellate judges said in a recent survey.

Twelve jurists, including Justice Stephen Breyer, responded to questions about their experiences with remote arguments in an article in the Journal of Appellate Practice and Process: “Remote Oral Arguments in the Age of Coronavirus: A Blip on the Screen or a Permanent Fixture?” In addition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the judges who participated in the survey sit on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the Supreme Judicial Courts of Maine and Massachusetts.

Continue reading . . .

Non-unanimous Juries and Prior Cases

by · Apr 27, 2020 7:42 am

Whenever the Supreme Court makes a significant change in the law — as it did last week when it overruled its prior approval of nonunanimous juries in state criminal cases, see this post — the question arises of what to do about cases that have already been tried under the old rule.

Today the high court sent back a bunch of cases from Louisiana and Oregon for reconsideration in light of the Ramos case. Justice Alito noted, “I concur in the judgment on the understanding that the Court is not deciding or expressing a view on whether the question was properly raised below but is instead leaving that question to be decided on remand.” Continue reading . . .