June 2019 Archives

The U.S. Supreme Court case of Mitchell v. Wisconsin, No. 18-6210, was supposed to be about the validity of "implied consent" laws, resolving a lingering question from the 2016 case of Birchfield v. North Dakota. Today, the Court decided the case, but on an "exigent circumstance" theory.

The plurality opinion says that the driver passing out is generally sufficient to create the needed exigency for an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement. Justice Thomas concurs in the judgment based on his view that "the natural metabolization of alcohol in the blood stream ' "creates an exigency once police have probable cause to believe the driver is drunk," ' regardless of whether the driver is conscious." Under the "narrower grounds" rule of Marks v. United States, the plurality opinion controls.
In most American jurisdictions, there are provisions by which a person who could be incarcerated for an offense can be released but subject to supervision under conditions. If he violates the conditions, he can be sent to jail or prison with a more expedited procedure and lower burden of proof than would be required for a new criminal conviction. These arrangements include probation, parole, and, in the federal system, "supervised release."

In most cases, the time that the conditions-violator spends behind bars is time he could have spent there for the original offense. However, in 18 U.S.C. §3583(k), Congress provided that violators found to have committed certain new offenses, including possession of child pornography, must receive an additional prison term of five years, not limited by the term for the original offense.

Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court held today that this term is more like a new conviction than a traditional parole/probation revocation, and it is subject to the requirements of trial by jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt under the Apprendi line of cases. The case is United States v. Haymond, No. 17-1672.

Violence Surging In CA Jails

| No Comments
In the roughly 8 1/2 years since California lawmakers embarked on an historic sentencing reform campaign, homicides in the state's county jails have increased by 46%.  Alyssa Hodenfield and John Walker of the Sacramento Bee report that the state's effort to eliminate prison overcrowding has transformed jails into violent and overcrowded mini-prisons with neither the resources, training, or the facilities to serve the influx of hardened repeat felons no longer eligible for prison.  In October of 2011, Governor Brown's "Public Safety Realignment" law, AB 109, took effect.  The law shifted sentences for habitual property and drug offenders from prison to county jails, requiring jails originally designed to hold drunks and petty thieves for a year or less to accommodate habitual drug dealers, wife beaters, car thieves, and commercial burglars for years rather than months.  While the state has classified these offenders as low risk for violence, many are violent, gang-affiliated criminals.  The article cites a study by the Public Policy Institute of California that AB 109 has not had an effect on public safety, although the FBI Uniform Crime Report has shown increased violent crime in California for 2015, 2016, and 2017.  This is the first three-year increase in violent crime since 1992.  Also, as noted in earlier posts, thousands of property crimes converted to misdemeanors by Proposition 47, are no longer reported to police, meaning while the overall crime rate (violent+property) appears slightly lower, this is a false indicator.

News Scan

| No Comments
SCOTUS Denies Indiana Murderer's Appeal:  An Indiana man convicted of setting a fire that killed two children has lost his bid to have the U.S. Supreme Court consider his claim that his attorney at sentencing was incompetent.  Mark Wilson of the Evansville Courier & Press reports that habitual criminal Jeffrey Weisheit, sentenced to death in 2013, claimed that his attorney's failure to thoroughly question jurors or present enough mitigating evidence at the sentencing hearing prejudiced his case, requiring that his sentence be overturned.  The high court denied review.  The state Supreme Court's November 2018 decision had held that the errors were harmless and that "overwhelming evidence of his guilt" supported his sentence.  Facts recounted in the decision indicate that in April 2010, Weisheit was living with his pregnant girlfriend when she left her eight-year-old daughter and five-year-old son in his care while she was at work.  After tying up the boy, Weisheit set fire to the house and drove off.  Both children died. When police located him in Kentucky, he resisted arrest and had to be tazed.

Puzzling Holding in Rehaif

| 2 Comments
Six Justices joined Justice Breyer's opinion today in Rehaif v. United States, a 12-page ruling overturning the conviction of an illegal alien in possession of a firearm.  The court held that while defendant Hamid Rehaif was indeed in the country illegally and did possess firearms, he may not have known his immigration status or that it was unlawful for an illegal alien to possess firearms. After acknowledging that "The Court of Appeals believed that the criminal law generally does not require a defendant to know his own status, and further observed that no court of appeals had required the Government to establish a defendant's knowledge of his status in the analogous context of felon-in-possession prosecutions," (emphasis added), the Court cites 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2) which states, "Whoever knowingly violates subsection (a)(6), (d), (g), (h), (i), (j), or (o) of section 922 shall be fined as provided in this title, imprisoned not more than 10, years, or both."  Section 922(g) specifies that it is unlawful for an illegal alien to possess a firearm. From this, the Court announced that the prosecution is required to prove that a defendant knew both his status and that he possessed a gun. In a dissent, Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, notes that the majority's holding "overturns the long-established interpretation of an important criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), an interpretation that has been adopted by every single Court of Appeals to address the question. That interpretation has been used in thousands of cases for more than 30 years."

Flowers v. Mississippi

| 2 Comments
Today, SCOTUS handed down the decision in Flowers v. Mississippi, which dealt with the state's use of peremptory strike of prospective black jurors.  I have not followed this case closely and I am still making my way through the opinions, but Justice Thomas's dissent states these rather important facts:

Confirming that we never should have taken this case, the Court almost entirely ignores--and certainly does not refute--the race-neutral reasons given by the State for striking Wright and four other black prospective jurors. Two of these prospective jurors knew Flowers' family and had been sued by Tardy Furniture-- the family business of one of the victims and also of one of the trial witnesses. One refused to consider the death penalty and apparently lied about working side-by-side with Flowers' sister. One was related to Flowers and lied about her opinion of the death penalty to try to get out of jury duty. And one said that because she worked with two of Flowers' family members, she might favor him and would not consider only the evidence presented.

Those seem like good reasons.  Perhaps I will change my mind as I read all of the opinions more closely. 

News Scan

| No Comments
SCOTUS To Hear Death Penalty Challenge:  The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the death penalty case of McKinney v. Arizona next term.  Jordan s. Ruban of Bloomberg Law reports that attorneys representing double-murderer Erin McKinney believe that because his 1993 sentencing did not comply with the Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Ring v. Arizona and that the sentencing jury did not consider McKinney's abusive childhood, he is entitled to be resentenced.  In March 1991, McKinney and his half-brother burglarized the home of Christine Mertens.  During the burglary McKinney beat Mertens, stabbed her several times then held her face down on the floor while shooting her in the back of the head.  Two weeks later the brothers burglarized the home of Jim McCain, shooting him in the back of the head while he slept in his bed.   

News Scan

| No Comments
San Francisco Institutes "Blind Charging:"  Timothy Williams of the New York Times reports that San Francisco's District Attorney, George Gascon, believes the key to solving potential racial biases may rest within removing demographic information from prosecutors. The concern for concealing this information from prosecutors is due to the majority of prosecutors being white and/or from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. "Blind Charging" aims at curbing racial prejudice in order to maintain fair charges and convictions regardless of ethnicity. Gascon is hoping this will lend some explanation as to why there is such a large statistical discrepancy among African American defendants charged and arrested in comparison to white defendants. If the outcome of this study proves to be unwavering from prior statistics, the reasoning behind this disproportion may be due to causes such as prior offenses/charges that the evidence is not accounting for.  San Francisco seems to be the first city to enact something of this kind and the results should be interesting.

Drug Bust of Nuestra Familia Prison Gang Troy Pope reports from Your Central Valley that U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott and other agencies announced the arrest of at least 50 individuals involved in drug-trafficking. Those involved had an association with either the Nuestra Familia prison gang or the Norteno street gang. The Nuestra Familia gang was found responsible for drug-trafficking a mass amount of methamphetamine and other controlled substances, as well as firearm offenses and other violent crimes. Unsurprisingly, the elite members of the Nuestra gang were found with contraband cell phones that were used to arrange the transportation of illicit drugs across border and state lines. The narcotics were then taken to a stash house in Kings County where gang members then prepared the drugs for delivery to dealers. This case illuminates how easily prison gangs have been able to run criminal enterprises out of California prisons. 

News Scan

| 1 Comment
Billion Dollar Coke Bust in Philly:  Federal law enforcement agents seized over $1 billion in cocaine from a freighter in a Philadelphia marine terminal today.  ABC News reports that 16.5 tons of the drug were discovered in shipping containers.  This follows a March bust which seized $77 million of cocaine from a ship in New York.  The Philadelphia bust is the largest in U.S. history.  Officials believe that the resurgence of cocaine trafficking is the result of an end to the eradication of coca plants in Columbia, causing an overabundance of the drug. 

CJLF Delivers Oral Argument in the 9th Circuit:  CJLF Legal Director Kent Scheidegger presented  oral argument before an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit today in the murder case of Ezzard Ellis v. C. Harrison.  The case involves a murderer's claim that his defense attorney's racial prejudice, which he did not know about during trial, nonetheless invalidates his conviction.  CJLF was invited to join the case after the California Attorney General declined to defend the conviction.  Ellis was convicted on strong evidence of opening fire on a car in the drive-through line at a crowded MacDonalds, killing one man and injuring a passenger, in order to steal the car.  The link to the oral argument is here.

News Scan

| No Comments
Teen Usage Up in Legal Pot States:  One of the most repeated promises from legalized marijuana advocates has been that allowing the government-regulated sale of the drug will assure that children do not have access to it.  Jennifer Oldham of the Washington Post reports that in the first two states to legalize recreational pot, parents, educators and physicians report that teen usage has increased with often devastating results.  In the Denver area, visits to Children's Hospital Colorado facilities for treatment of cyclic vomiting, paranoia, psychosis and other acute cannabis-related symptoms jumped to 777 in 2015, from 161 in 2005.  A 2018 study by the Journal of Adolescent Health determined that surveys finding that pot use among children has not changed much since 2014, may not reflect the impact of legalization on adolescent health.  Washington's latest Health Youth Survey found that 20% of eighth graders and nearly half of high school seniors consider marijuana to be a low risk activity, although medical and mental health professionals say the impact of high potency pot and edibles is doing major damage to adolescent brains.  "I hope we don't lose a generation of people before we become clear we need to protect our kids' brains," said an adolescent medicine specialist at Seattle Children's Hospital.  But there is a trade off.  Washington raked in $358 million and Colorado reported $266 million in government revenue from pot sales in 2018. 

Ferguson Civil Case Dismissed

| No Comments
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, en banc, has reversed an order of the District Court and ordered Dorian Johnson's suit against Officer Darren Wilson, the City of Ferguson, and the former Chief of Police dismissed. Johnson was the companion of Michael Brown in the notorious 2014 incident. Johnson claimed that Brown had his hands up at the time of the shooting. Riots ensued. A subsequent investigation by USDoJ found that Johnson's story was false, and Brown attacked Officer Wilson.

Despite being the cause of such horrific damage, Johnson actually sued, claiming that his Fourth Amendment rights were abridged. Because this case is decided pretrial, Johnson's version of events is assumed to be correct. The court held that even with that assumption, Johnson was never seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. He was simply ordered to stop walking down the middle of the street, which is illegal, and move to the sidewalk where pedestrians are supposed to walk.

The case is Johnson v. City of Ferguson, No. 16-1697. CJLF filed an amicus brief in support of the defendants.
A recurring issuing in the law of federal habeas corpus is whether and when a federal court can hold an evidentiary hearing because it is dissatisfied with the fact-finding in the case by the state court. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to resolve a circuit split on this issue, denying certiorari in the Illinois case of Brookhart v. Lee, No. 18-1197 and the Arizona case of Apelt v. Ryan, No. 18-8386.

No Standing For You

| No Comments
The U.S. Supreme Court today drop-kicked the Virginia House of Delegates' challenge to a decision striking down the state's reapportionment law. The state's Governor and Attorney General had declined to appeal.* The Court ruled that a single house of the legislature has no standing to appeal such a decision.

CJLF had filed an amicus brief in the case, Virginia House of Delegates v. Bethune-Hill, No. 18-281, concerned that narrow standing rules impact the ability of victims of crime to seek redress in federal civil cases affecting state criminal judgments. On a quick read, this opinion seems largely limited to legislative cases.
Under the Double Jeopardy Clause, neither the federal government nor a state government can try a person twice for the same offense. But if the same act is a crime under both state and federal law, can each government try the person once, for a total of two?

Longstanding U.S. Supreme Court precedent says yes. Today the high court reaffirmed the "dual sovereignty doctrine" by a vote of 7-2 in Gamble v. United States, No. 17-646. Justice Alito wrote the opinion of the Court. Justices Ginsburg and Gorsuch wrote separate dissents.

Addiction and Homelessness

| 2 Comments
Christopher Rufo has an article in the City Journal titled An Addiction Crisis Disguised as a Housing Crisis: Opioids are fueling homelessness on the West Coast.

Progressive political activists allege that tech companies have inflated housing costs and forced middle-class people onto the streets. Declaring that "no two people living on Skid Row . . . ended up there for the same reasons," Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti, for his part, blames a housing shortage, stagnant wages, cuts to mental health services, domestic and sexual abuse, shortcomings in criminal justice, and a lack of resources for veterans. These factors may all have played a role, but the most pervasive cause of West Coast homelessness is clear: heroin, fentanyl, and synthetic opioids.

News Scan

| No Comments
Soros Money Flips Virginia CA Elections:  Progressive democrat primary candidates for Commonwealth Attorney (CA) in Arlington and Fairfax Counties in Virginia beat the less progressive incumbents thanks to big bucks from large out-of-state billionaire George Soros.  Adam Shaw of Fox News and the Associated Press report that neither Soros-backed candidate for the top prosecutor job in those counties has ever prosecuted a case in a state court, while the incumbents had 60 years of experience between them.  While both counties are quite liberal, both incumbents, Theo Stamos and Raymond Morrough, opposed giving voting rights to felons.  Along with sentencing reform (read sentencing reduction), both Soros-backed candidates Parisa  Dehghani-Tafti and Steve Descano supported felon voting.  Dehghani-Tafti's campaign received $583,000 from the Soros-funded Justice and Public Safety PAC, while Descano received $392,000.  This is huge money for a county prosecutor's race. The Stamos and Morrough campaigns raised a total of $162,000 and $242,000 respectively.  Over the last two election cycles, Soros has spent millions of dollars to purchase elections for pro-defendant progressives as District Attorneys and Sheriffs in California, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and New Mexico.     
In states that have legalized marijuana, the predictions of beneficial effects by the legalization advocates have regularly fallen short.  Steven Malanga has this article in the City Journal.

It takes lots of marijuana to make 1 billion joints, but that's how much pot Oregon has on hand right now--enough to supply the state's marijuana "needs" for six years, even if production stopped right now. The vast oversupply is causing worries that growers, who have made huge investments in their business ever since Oregon legalized recreational marijuana use five years ago, will turn to the black market to dispose of inventory. That, state authorities fear, could lead to new federal enforcement in Oregon--prosecutors busted a black-market ring there last year. To stem the excess, Oregon is moving to deny new licenses to growers, but the state will likely have to take away some current licenses, too, or watch some growers go bust, before the problem disappears.
The common-law judges of Olde England defined burglary very narrowly because it was a capital offense and they wanted to avoid hanging people for it. That produced the multi-element definition so popular* on law school criminal law exams. Once we stopped hanging people for burglary, legislatures broadened the definition, but they did not all broaden it in the same way or to the same extent.

This creates a problem for punishing habitual criminals prosecuted for a new crime by a different jurisdiction than the one in which the prior crime was committed. In the federal Armed Career Criminal Act, a felon who illegally possesses a gun and has three designated priors gets 15+ years and is not eligible for probation. See 18 U.S.C. §924(e). "Burglary" is one of the designated priors, but what exactly is a "burglary"?

This multi-faceted question has been to the Supreme Court many times, and the Court addressed one more facet today in Quarles v. United States, No. 17-778. At what point in the crime must the perpetrator have formed the intent to steal, or commit some other crime, within the building?
Virginia is holding a primary election tomorrow. Among the races are the Commonwealth's Attorney seat for Arlington County and the neighboring City of Falls Church and the seat for Fairfax County. These are the local prosecutor's offices.  Nicholas Benton reports for the Falls Church News-Press:

Campaign contribution data for the last two months made public by the Virginia Board of Elections this Monday has shown an eye-popping $583,237 has donated by a nebulous "dark money" Washington, D.C.-based source to a challenger in the June 11 primary in the race for Arlington-Falls Church Commonwealth's Attorney.

According to the Washington Post, the money comes from billionaire George Soros, who has also lobbed another whopping $392,000 into Fairfax County in an effort to unseat the incumbent commonwealth attorney there.
Leaders of the notorious Aryan Brotherhood prison gang were indicted in Federal Court Thursday for ordering killings, smuggling drugs, cigarettes and cell phones.  Stan Stanton of the Sacramento Bee reports that the charges are the result of a years long investigation by federal authorities into the gang's activities both in and outside of California prisons. Wiretaps monitored over 1,800 phone calls during the investigation disclosing orders from the gang's leaders for killings, and allowing agents to warn some of the targets before they became victims.  Among the 16 gang members indicted by U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott were two of the gang's leaders, both serving life terms for murder.  Both filed lawsuits against the state regarding solitary confinement at the high security prison at Pelican Bay.  The suits sparked a well- publicized 2014 hunger strike by inmates that resulted in Governor Brown softening state policy and allowing more of the gang's members into the general population.  Investigators say this enabled the gang to expand its illegal activities.  The head of the state prison system, Ralph Diaz disputes this, defending his department's handling of prisons.

Where Criminals Get Their Guns

| No Comments
Here is a statistics note from the BJS monthly recap. Where do criminals get the guns they possess during their crimes or actually use in their crimes? Last January, BJS issued a report of its survey of prison inmates in 2016. From Table 5 of the report:

43% Off the street/underground market
25% Obtained from individual
10% Purchased at retail
 6%  Theft
17% Other
Phil Matier reports in the SF Chronicle:

The Home Depot in Oakland is having problems with homelessness and crime, and it's gotten so bad that the hardware chain may shut the store unless the city can curb the thefts and clean up the tent and RV camps that dot the area, City Councilman Noel Gallo said.
In Sierra Club v. Trump, USCA9 No. 19-16102, the Government has filed an emergency motion for stay of the injunction against the use of transferred DoD funds for building border barriers. Given the relevant time frames, the stay may be the whole ball game. If USCA9 declines, expect a motion to the SCOTUS.

News Scan

| No Comments
Oakland legalizes Magic Mushrooms, Peyote:  The City Counsel of Oakland, California voted unanimously Tuesday to legalize psilocybin, otherwise known as "magic mushrooms" and peyote.  Both are strong hallucinogens which Carlos Castaneda noted in his 1972 book, Journey to Ixtlan can lead a person to an alternative reality.  Elizabeth Weise and Marco della Cava of USA Today report that Oakland was a step behind of Denver, with legalized the drugs last month.  More than 30 supporters testified that the "plant medications" were helpful for trauma, depression, addiction and anxiety.  This may be true for users experiencing the wild hallucinations Castaneda describes.  The drugs became popular in the 1970s because of their hallucinogenic effects, which rivaled LSD.  This is probably not a good thing.         

SCOTUS Won't Hasten DACA Review

| No Comments
On May 24, the U.S. Government asked the Supreme Court to review a decision of the Fourth Circuit that the administration's decision to wind down the "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" program was "arbitrary and capricious." In other words, the executive branch had previously decided to stop enforcing the law, and the judiciary enjoined the executive from retracting that decision and resuming enforcement of the law.
Not too much action on the criminal law front this SCOTUS Monday.

The U.S. Supreme Court today decided Mont v. United States, No. 17-8995, related to calculation of credit for time served in federal criminal cases. Court-watchers will note an unusual 5-4 lineup, with Justice Ginsburg joining four "conservative" justices in the majority and Justice Gorsuch joining three "liberals" in the dissent.

My favorite "Ginsburg plus four conservatives" case remains Montana v. Egelhoff, 518 U.S. 37 (1996). (That is not an entirely unbiased opinion.)

The Court accepted for full review one sentencing procedure case, Holguin-Hernandez v. United States, No. 18-7739.

Monthly Archives