Skip to main content

Douglas Cogan

Search This Blog

About

Get link
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Court Reporter
A Proud alumnus of Kean University.
Responsible for recording everything that is said by all of the parties participating in formal trials inside the court

Get link
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Notable Washington Supreme Court discussion of recidivist LWOP sentences while rejecting challenge to use of young adult "first strikes"

Last fall, the Washington Supreme Court showed its willingness to strike down various extreme sentences when it concluded the state's death penalty administration was so arbitrary as to be violative of the state constitution , and soon thereafter in a distinct ruling decided to categorically bar the imposition of a juvenile life without parole based again on the state constitution . But earlier this month, this Court refused to extend this constitutional jurisprudence to LWOP sentences imposed under its recidivist statutes in Washington v. Moretti, No. 95263-9 (Wash. Aug 15, 2019) ( available here ). Here is how the opinion for the unanimous Court gets started and concludes: Under the Persistent Offender Accountability Act(POAA), the third time a person is convicted of a "most serious offense," they mustbe sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. RCW9.94A.030(38)(a), .570. This statute is colloquially known as the "three strikes andyou

A few juicy SCOTUS relists (to temper the guideline-vagueness denials) for sentencing fans

Over at SCOTUSblog, John Elwood continues his yeoman's work via his "Relist Watch" postings which highlight cases that the Supreme Court considered but did not resolve during recent certiorari review conferences. In this week's installment of "Relist Watch," we get started with a review of the news, blogged here , that cert was (somewhat surprisingly) denied on oft-relisted vagueness challenges to pre- Booker mandatory application of career-offender guideline. But thereafter we get the details on some interesting new additions to the relist watch that should intrigue criminal justice fans (with links from the original): The court also denied review without comment in a knot of cases involving whether sentence enhancements imposed under the residual clause of the then-mandatory sentencing guidelines’ career offender provision were constitutionally infirm because the clause is similar to an Armed Career Criminal Act provision declared unconstitutionall

Previewing SCOTUS consideration of civil forfeiture in Timbs v. Indiana from many sources

On Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Timbs v. Indiana to consider whether the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of excessive fines applies to the states. I am reasonably confident that the Justices will decide that the Excessive Fines Clause does apply to the states, but I am not so confident about what more the Court will say about the application of the EFC to the interesting (and fairly simple) facts surrounding the forefeiture of Tyson Timbs' Land Rover. Because there is a whole lot worth saying about the facts and law surrounding Timbs , I figured I would link to a whole bunch of folks from a whole bunch of sources discussing this case. So: NBC News: Ex-heroin addict goes all the way to the Supreme Court to get back his confiscated Land Rover SCOTUSblog: Argument preview: Justices to consider whether Eighth Amendment ban on “excessive fines” applies to the states ABA Journal : What can states seize? SCOTUS will decide whether the

Powered by Blogger

Theme images by dino4