News
Read More
Articles
Fraud
For the most part, there is no single crime called "fraud." However, fraud is an intrinsic part of a number of offenses, most notably those in the theft category. The early theft crime of larceny required a taking of property from the possession of another; therefore using deceit to take the property of another that had been entrusted to the offender was not punishable because it was not larceny. The crime of embezzlement was established to close this loophole in theft law. Embezzlement is committed when the offender fraudulently converts the property of another, which is already in the offender's possession. Fraudulent conversion occurs when the offender seriously interferes with the victim's rights over the property by using it up, giving it away, unreasonably withholding possession from the victim, or seriously damaging the property with the intent to benefit himself and deprive the victim. Fraudulent intent requires a finding that the offender had the specific intent to deceive the victim, and mere negligence in the handling of the property will not sustain a conviction.
Read More
Strange but True Laws
Most Americans have a general understanding of what constitutes a crime. However, there are a host of "strange but true" laws which exist in states, cities, and towns across America which may come as a shock to most people. While some of these laws have been taken off the books, and are therefore no longer considered a crime, in other cases, these laws remain in statutes or codes, but have lain dormant and have not been enforced for years. By all means, the following are intended to be only a representative sample of strange laws . . . there are plenty more of them out there, so be on your guard!
Read More
|
|
Case Summaries
[02/03]
US v. Mahin
In a prosecution on two counts of possessing a firearm or ammunition while subject to a domestic violence protective order in violation of 18 USC section 922(g)(8), the judgment of conviction is: 1) affirmed in part, where the statute and its application to the defendant's firearm use the same day he was served with a protective order did not violate the Second Amendment under the intermediate scrutiny standard; and 2) reversed in part and remanded for resentencing, where it was plain error to convict and sentence the defendant on two separate counts for the simultaneous possession of a firearm and ammunition under section 922(g)(8).
[02/03]
US v. Culbertson
In a prosecution in which the defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to import 100 grams or more of heroin and five kilograms or more of cocaine, the case is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate the judgment of conviction, where: 1) there was an inadequate factual basis for the defendant's guilty plea with respect to the quantity of drugs for which he was responsible; and 2) the district court's error in accepting the defendant's plea was not harmless.
[02/03]
US v. Leahy
In a sentencing challenge brought by a defendant convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, the district court's 10-year sentence is affirmed, where: 1) the district court's application of enhancements under the sentencing guidelines and its inclusion of criminal history points was procedurally reasonable; and 2) the sentence, although the maximum possible, was substantively reasonable, as the district court articulated a plausible sentencing rationale and imposed a sentence within the range of reasonable outcomes.
[02/02]
US v. Rivera-Santana
In a sentencing challenge after the appellant was convicted of illegal reentry into the United States after being removed for a conviction of an aggravated felony, the sentencing court's judgment order is affirmed, where: 1) two upward departures in the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, augmented by an upward variance of 90 months therefrom, were not procedurally unreasonable; and 2) the resulting sentence, which was the statutory maximum, was not substantively unreasonable.
Read More
|
