Women in jails and prisons face significant and often overlooked gender-specific health challenges, including a lack of reproductive care, pregnanc
In an Idaho tax-fraud trial, just as the jury is on the cusp of a verdict, one juror informs the judge that another juror made a racist comment about people of Mexican ethnicity. Things like, "The Mexicans, all they want to do is screw us over anyway”; Defendant’s employer "could have come up from the cartel”; and "when Mexicans come here, they act like they can't speak English to get away with certain things."
For some clever lawyering, check out this Eighth Circuit (2-1) decision. In 2024, the Supreme Court held in Erlinger v. United States, that for a certain enhanced mandatory minimum to apply, a jury, not a judge, must find the predicate facts about a prior serious drug conviction. But a statute, 21 U.S.C.
The Andrea Taylor Sentencing Advocacy Workshop focuses on a vital area of federal practice that has evolved since the Supreme Court declared the fe
This Tenth Circuit case is interesting for two reasons. One, it accepts the government's concession that it's plain error to sentence an assault defendant more harshly simply because he was an off-duty police officer. Sentence vacated. Two, it's kind of the 1997 Julia Roberts movie My Best Friend's Wedding (but an R-Rated version where Rupert Everett almost gets shot).
Most criminal defendants try to avoid being sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act, which sets a 15-year mandatory minimum for certain defendants if they have three previous convictions for certain qualifying offenses. Defendant: In the district court, I pleaded guilty and accidentally agreed that I had three qualifying offenses. But in reality, I had only two! So my 212-month sentence is a mistake. Sixth Circuit: Shrugs. You and your lawyer should've been more careful.
This program is a skills-based workshop during which participants work on one of their own cases and learn how to use fact-busting and principles o
Today, a unanimous Supreme Court held that restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA) is plainly criminal punishment for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Ellinger v. United States, No. 24-482 (Jan. 20, 2026).
Justice Kavanaugh delivered the unanimous opinion of the court. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Gorsuch. The Court’s opening paragraphs summarize the relevant facts and holding:
You know when there’s a chart in the procedural history section of a habeas case that you're going to need to buckle up. And so it is in the Fourth Circuit this week, where a Baltimore drug deal was broken up by cops and the purported seller threw a bag on the ground and made a run for it. The bag contained 10 grams of cocaine, and prosecutors rely on two chain-of-custody reports. But the reports have discrepancies, and one wasn't handed over until the second day of trial.
The Federal Defender’s Office for Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, working in collaboration with the Federal Capital Trial Project, will host a regional training on the Fundamentals of Federal Capital Defense on January 15, 2026, in Boston. This is a first of its kind.