Remove Court Rules Remove Felony Remove Government Remove Statute
article thumbnail

Court limits definition of “violent felony” in federal gun-possession penalty

SCOTUSBlog

Share A fractured Supreme Court on Thursday narrowed the scope of a key phrase in the Armed Career Criminal Act, ruling that crimes involving recklessness do not count as “violent felonies” for the purpose of triggering a key sentencing enhancement. The Supreme Court reversed that decision on Thursday. The case, Borden v.

Felony 128
article thumbnail

Supreme Court will answer teed-up bail questions and decide felony-murder resentencing issue; it depublishes arbitration opinion

At the Lectern

At yesterday’s Supreme Court conference , a double one, actions of note included: Court allows clemency for one, returns files to be redacted for four others. 5th 135 decision (see here ), the court declined to address the first issue ( id. ” The Supreme Court denied the defendant’s petition for review in Howard.

Felony 40
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

On the narrow road to challenge a federal conviction, when is a vehicle “inadequate”?

SCOTUSBlog

Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit ruled he cannot pursue a petition because he already filed a motion under Section 2255, which bars him from filing a successive petition, and he should have raised his claim earlier. 922(g) prohibits people with felony convictions from possessing a firearm.

Felony 94
article thumbnail

No sentencing enhancements for recklessness convictions under federal Armed Career Criminal Act

SCOTUSBlog

United States , the Supreme Court analyzed the Armed Career Criminal Act ’s force clause or elements clause. Under the ACCA, a person who has three violent felony convictions and is then convicted of possessing a firearm faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years. The case came to the court after Charles Borden Jr.

article thumbnail

What constitutes “identity theft”?

SCOTUSBlog

In recent years, the Supreme Court has expressed misgivings about white-collar prosecutions under broadly worded statutes. In its brief in opposition , the government contends that the decision does not “implicate any split of authority” and the case would be a “poor vehicle for reviewing the question presented.” United States.

Statute 121
article thumbnail

US Supreme Court rules states lack constitutional standing in key immigration case

JURIST

The US Supreme Court ruled Friday in US v. The crux of the case rests on Article III of the US Constitution, which governs the Court’s judicial purview. The crux of the case rests on Article III of the US Constitution, which governs the Court’s judicial purview.

article thumbnail

Was Rittenhouse’s Possession of the AR-15 Unlawful?

JonathanTurley

At trial, however, prosecutor Thomas Binger at points seemed to be learning the governing law from Rittenhouse. He told the prosecutors “I have been wrestling with this statute with, I’d hate to count the hours I’ve put into it, I’m still trying to figure out what it says, what’s prohibited. I have a legal education.”

Statute 58