by Douglas Ankney

The Supreme Court of Maryland (formerly known as the Court of Appeals of Maryland) held that the methodology of firearms identification presented to the trial court did not provide a reliable basis for the expert witness’ unqualified opinion that four bullets and one bullet fragment found at ...

by Douglas Ankney

The Court of Appeal of California, Sixth Appellate District, held that the Monterey County Superior Court plainly abused its discretion when it refused to recall the sentence of terminally ill prisoner Adnan Judeh Nijmeddin following the recommendation of the Health Care Services Director (“Director”) of the California ...

by Douglas Ankney

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed a District Court’s dismissal of Larone F. Elijah’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“habeas petition”) where the District Court characterized Elijah’s objections to the magistrate’s report and recommendation (“R&R”) as an attempt to ...

by Douglas Ankney

In deepening an already wide Circuit split, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit announced that the Court cannot defer to Application Note 1 to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”) § 4B1.2(b) because the Guideline is unambiguous and does not include inchoate offenses for purposes of career ...

by Douglas Ankney

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s denial of Darryl E. Coleman’s motion for a sentence reduction under § 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018 (“FSA”) because the District Court’s failure to expressly ...

by Anthony W. Accurso

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” and requires that warrants be issued only “upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.”

This language was crafted in response to general warrants issued in pre-revolutionary American colonies which allowed officers to conduct a “general, exploratory rummaging” through the homes and businesses of any person remotely suspected of criminal activity. Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971). While such warrants were not strictly legal under English law, the structures of judicial oversight were often rigged against the colonists.

Sometimes known as “writs of assistance,” these warrants were “widely used by British officials to search colonists’ imported goods to ensure compliance with the tax code.” In an 1817 letter, Founding Father and future President John Adams referred to a speech (which condemned such abuses) given by James Otis, a young lawyer from Boston, as “the birth of America’s struggle for independence.”

The wording of the Fourth Amendment with respect to ...

by Douglas Ankney

The California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, reversed Dwayne Lamont Burgess’ felony murder conviction because the evidence was insufficient to support the underlying predicate felony of attempted robbery.

In December 1990, Burgess was a participant in a crime that ended in the death of a drug dealer. The plan was to cheat the victim by giving him some real money wrapped around a wad of fake bills in exchange for marijuana. But after Burgess handed the fake money to the victim, the victim called the deal off. Burgess fired his gun into the air to scare him and then ran off. Burgess heard another gunshot when his cousin shot and killed the victim.

Burgess was convicted by a jury of attempted robbery and first-degree felony murder. The jury also found he personally used a firearm in the commission of each offense. He was sentenced to prison for a term of 29 years to life on the murder and its enhancement while the sentence for the attempted robbery and its enhancement was stayed.

Burgess subsequently petitioned for resentencing under California Penal Code § 1172.6 and was granted a hearing under subdivision (d)(3). (Note: All statutory references are ...

by Douglas Ankney

Gersh Kuntzman, editor of Streetsblog, spent the first quarter of 2023 documenting New York Police Department (“NYPD”) officers who defaced their license plates, making the plates unreadable to the city’s speed, red-light, and bus-lane violation cameras. The results of the investigations into his complaints reveal none of the offending officers were disciplined.

Sergeant Ronald Paulin earned more than $228,000 in 2022. Kuntzman photographed Paulin’s new Tesla that had no front license plate or registration. But the investigator who interviewed Paulin stated Paulin no longer owned the vehicle. However, the investigator indicated that the vehicle Paulin no longer owned was a 2019 Nissan Altima. There was no follow-up investigation concerning the new Tesla displaying Paulin’s license plate in the rear but no front plate.

Detective Christopher McGuinness – who was paid $177,773 last year – had a license plate with the “D” and “V” scratched off, rendering the plate illegible. Lt. Juan Solla reported that he informed McGuinness that the plate had some peeled paint, and should it deteriorate further, it would need to be replaced. 

Lieutenant Craig Baco, who was paid $179,000 in 2022, scraped off the last four digits of his front plate. According to the ...

by Douglas Ankney

The New York Court of Appeals held that until the jury returns to the courtroom and publicly announces and confirms the verdict, the defendant is still presumed innocent, so the constitutional prohibition on restraining a defendant without explanation remains in force.

Oscar Sanders was tried by jury on several charges, including attempted assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree. After the jury advised the trial court it had reached a verdict but had not yet returned to the courtroom, defense counsel observed the defendant in handcuffs and made the following objection:

“I understand that it’s this court’s policy, I just learned this minutes ago, to keep my client in handcuffs while the jury comes out and renders their verdict. But it’s my understanding that the law allows for the defense and Prosecution to poll the jury with the idea in mind that perhaps unanimity of the jury can be questioned when the foreperson announces a unanimous jury. And with that in mind, being that the defendant is in handcuffs while they announce that verdict, especially in the case of it’s a verdict of guilty, lends pressure to anyone who might dissent during that ...

by Douglas Ankney

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated two 18 U.S.C. § 924 convictions that were predicated on attempted Hobbs Act robbery because attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not categorically a crime of violence.

In 2018, Dwaine Collymore pleaded guilty to four counts, viz., conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery (Count 1); attempted Hobbs Act robbery (Count 2); using, brandishing, and discharging a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i), (ii), (iii), and (2) (Count 3); and murdering a person with a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(j)(1) and (2) (Count 4). The predicate “crime of violence” sustaining the convictions of Counts 3 and 4 was the attempted Hobbs Act robbery of Count 2. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York sentenced Collymore to 525 months in prison, and he timely appealed.

The Second Circuit affirmed, but in 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded to the Second Circuit for further consideration in light of United States v. Taylor, 142 S. Ct. 2015 (2022).

Collymore argued that ...