Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant policy concern—it is already shaping evidence, risk assessments, and sentencing recommendations in federal courtrooms. For defense lawyers, the challenge is not just understanding what these tools claim to measure, but also exposing their blind spots, biases, and the secrecy surrounding their design.
"Limiting the Government’s Ability to Impeach Our Clients with Prior Convictions: 'Substantial' Developments to Federal Rule of Evidence 609" was written by Rene L. Valladares, Federal Defender District of Nevada, and Hannah Nelson, Assistant Federal Public Defender, District of Nevada for the NACDL's journal The Champion. It is copyrighted by The Champion and will be published in January/February 2026 edition.
The Drug Enforcement Administration has quietly ended its body camera program barely four years after it began, according to an internal email. See ProPublica article.
One of the most-read novellas of all time, Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, clocks in at, depending on what edition you pick up, around 120 pages. Not to be outdone, the 15-judge en banc Fourth Circuit provides 126 pages of eight non-precedential concurrences, plus one dissent, in addressing whether geofence warrants are unconstitutional.
Dentist writes two hefty morphine scripts after an eight-hour dental procedure; the patient tragically ODs and her blood test comes back triple the fatal amount. The jury finds that the dentist knowingly issued an illegal prescription; he's convicted and gets a 20-year sentence. Dentist appeals, arguing that the jury wrongfully heard testimony—over the defense’s objection—about an earlier forged-prescription and a profanity-laced firing.
New York man covicted of armed robbery is sentenced to 100 months' imprisonment plus five years of supervised release, during which he cannot commit a new crime. Man commits more crimes, including allegedly assaulting his ex-girlfriend. But when she refuses to testify at his supervised release revocation hearing, the court relies on her signed statemet to police and revokes his supervised release. Man: that doesn't seem right. District court: it's right, and here's a 28-month sentence. Second Circuit (over a dissent): Seems right.
For the last five years, driverless car companies have been testing their vehicles on public roads. These vehicles constantly roam neighborhoods while laden with a variety of sensors including video cameras capturing everything going on around them to operate safely and analyze instances where they don't (view full article).
The U.S. Supreme Court struggled during oral arguments Wednesday over whether its landmark Miranda ruling allows criminal suspects to file civil suits against police officers who don't warn them of their rights against self-incrimination.
West Virginia used-car dealers file motion to suppress evidence obtained during search, and four years later a court agrees that the state trooper who applied for the warrant omitted important facts and made misleading statements and dismisses the criminal charges (failing to disclose to customers that their cars had been totaled before being refurbished) with prejudice. Fourth Circuit: But it's too late for them to sue the trooper over the unconstitutional search. They should have sued while the criminal case was still pending.
Two Richmond, Va. police approached a man walking on the street whom they believe match the description of a suspect. Cops: "Yo! Let me talk to you real quick" and motioned man to come over. Man: "Nah" and kept walking. Cop: Yo! Hey! And continued towards man. Man: about to take off running but immediately trips and fall. Cops tackle and arrest man, then searched the bag the man had on him, which contained a gun and box of ammunition. Man: firearm and un-Mirandized statements made after gun found should be suppressed. District court: no, cops had reasonable suspicion.