|
 |
 |
              |
|
[07/22]
US v. Carnagie
Grant of defendants' motion for judgment of acquittal after a jury found them guilty of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and conspiracy to commit money laundering is reversed and remanded where: 1) the evidence did not support broad conspiracies to defraud the U.S. and to launder money whereby defendants acted "together" for their "shared mutual benefit"; 2) thus, they were not interdependent coconspirators and the government failed to prove the two widespread conspiracies charged; but 3) even though a variance occurred, defendants did not suffer substantial prejudice as a result.
[07/22]
US v. De La Mata
In a case where the government obtained defendants' promises to convey certain interests in property to the United States, in lieu of a forfeiture trial and sentence, an order granting the government's motion for a "final order of forfeiture" is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) individual defendants and corporate defendants were properly before the court of appeals; 2) the circuit court rejects individual defendants' argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the government's motion sought relief in a criminal case via amended sentences; but 3) corporate defendants were not parties to individual defendants' agreements and thus retained certain property interests.
[07/21]
US v. Brantley
An above-Guidelines sentence and fine for check counterfeiting and bank fraud is affirmed as reasonable where a sentencing court: 1) may rely upon factors already incorporated by the Guidelines to support a non-Guidelines sentence; and 2) need not make specific findings regarding a defendant's ability to pay a fine recommended by a presentence report.
[07/18]
US v. Johnson
Defendant's sentence for fraud and conspiracy is affirmed where: 1) defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel; 2) the district court is not required to review every sentencing factor in a checklist fashion in arriving at a sentence; and 3) defendant did not present evidence sufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attached to his within-Guidelines sentence.
[07/18]
US v. Finnerty
In a securities-fraud case, judgment setting aside jury's guilty verdict is affirmed where defendant's conducting of "interpositioning" trades was not deceptive or misleading.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
Copyright © 2008 by Law Office of Scott P. Lopez. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.
