To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
May 17-22, 2009.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 19, 2009 US v. Paret-Ruiz , No. 06-2709
Conviction for conspiracy to import cocaine with intent to distribute is reversed and remanded with instructions to enter a verdict of not guilty where the evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that defendant had an agreement to import or possess cocaine with anyone other than a government agent.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, May 20, 2009 US v. Pulido , No. 08-1626
Conviction and sentence on drug and firearms charges is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not commit reversible error in denying defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea without conducting an evidentiary hearing, as defendant’s allegations that his plea was not voluntary and knowing were contradicted by the record; 2) the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to recuse based on the court’s statement about defendant in a different case, as the evidence shows that there was no likely appearance of partiality; 3) the court did not err and fail to consider mitigating evidence related to the U.S.S.G. sec. 3553(a) factors, as the record shows the court considered all of the mitigating evidence; and 4) the court did not err in imposing the mandatory minimum sentence for the firearm count under 18 U.S.C. sec. 924(c). ..
U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, May 20, 2009 US v. Jones, No. 07-2798 Conviction for conspiracy to commit murder, attempted murder and assault with a dangerous weapon under the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering Act is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to restart jury selection after six co-defendants pled guilty during voir dire, and thus did not violate his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights; 2) the court properly rejected defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on his conviction for murder conspiracy, as a rational jury could have found all elements of the murder conspiracy charge beyond a reasonable doubt; 3) the court did not abuse its discretion by admitting challenged evidence at trial as the evidence did not overwhelm the jury or prejudice its judgment; and 4) defendant’s sentence was not procedurally or substantively unreasonable.
Continue reading
