by David M. Reutter
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that a properly filed Kentucky post-conviction application remains “pending” under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2) during a belated appeal authorized by Kentucky’s deficient-counsel exception. The petitioner requested relief before the one-year period expired, so …
by David M. Reutter
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that “conspiring” in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 incorporates the generic 1989 definition of conspiracy, which requires genuine agreement by at least two participants. Because Indiana Code § 35-41-5-2 also criminalizes unilateral conspiracy with an …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Hawai’i unanimously rejected in its entirety the four-factor continuance test of State v. Lee, 856 P.2d 1279 (Haw. Ct. App. 1993), and announced the standard governing a State motion to continue based on witness unavailability. A court is first to …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that theft by deception is not a continuing offense for purposes of the statute of limitations, while receiving stolen property (“RSP”) continues only so long as the defendant retains the stolen property. Construing for the first time the …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Florida unanimously held that Florida’s district courts of appeal may review a trial court’s refusal to impose a downward departure sentence. The Court reasoned that a sentencing order is a final order of a trial court, that the Florida Constitution …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Louisiana, applying the state’s factual innocence statute for the first time, affirmed post-conviction relief vacating the first-degree murder conviction and death sentence of a prisoner whose trial rested on since-discredited bite mark and forensic pathology evidence. The Court held that …
by David M. Reutter
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is not an unauthorized “second or successive” motion when it challenges a new, intervening amended judgment entered after the movant established in earlier § 2255 …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Louisiana affirmed a district court’s ruling that La. R.S. 15:168(E)(3), which declares that no court “shall have jurisdiction to order the payment of any funds administered by the office or district public defender for expert witnesses, or for any other …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Maryland unanimously reversed the judgment of the Appellate Court, holding that a police officer lacked reasonable suspicion under the totality of the circumstances to stop Xavier S. Kopp’s vehicle. The Court concluded that a tip from the officer’s personal acquaintance …
by David M. Reutter
The Supreme Court of Oregon held that the competency requirement of OEC 601 asks only whether a person possesses sufficient general capacity to perceive, recollect, and communicate so as to serve as a witness at all, and it does not authorize a trial court …
