High court reins in prosecution; it rules that the name and nature of prior offense could be unduly prejudicial if the defendant concedes a past conviction

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court in Old Chief v. United States showed by its 5-4 division the sharp disagreement among the circuits over whether defendants in possession-by-a-felon cases can keep juries from learning the names of their prior offenses by conceding the prior felony element. The trial court was held to have abused its discretion by admitting the defendant's prior judgment of conviction despite the defendant's offer to stipulate to the fac of his prior conviction. The court made a detailed explanation of how trial judges should balance probative value against unfair prejudice, as required by Federal Rule of Evidence 403.

Testimony, Evidence, Criminal, Criminal evidence, Prior conviction

---

Room for flexibility in sentencing corporations; good corporate citizenship may mitigate harsh results under federal sentencing guidelines

Article Abstract:

The US Sentencing Commission's organizational sentencing guidelines were not meant to eliminate all judicial discretion, and lesser sentences based on good corporate citizenship and special circumstances should still be possible. Although there is no case law on good corporate citizenship as a mitigating factor at sentencing, there is an argument that case law on individual defendants should apply to corporations as well. Conduct of one employee which might expose employees and shareholders of a corporation to severe financial hardship might also be an extraordinary circumstance which could mitigate a sentence.

Analysis, Sentences (Criminal procedure), Corporations, Crime

---

DOJ guidelines offer strategy clues; 'Federal Prosecution of Corporations' can assist defense counsel in understanding factors agency weighs in deciding to indict

Article Abstract:

Issues are discussed regarding the nonbinding guidelines on the federal prosecution of corporations issued in 2000 by the Department of Justice. The defense counsel will find pre-indictment advocacy guidelines here, and using the common vocabulary of these guidelines and noting the similarities and differences between corporate and individual defendants that they articulate provide the best chance of persuading the government not to charge.

United States, Criminal liability of juristic persons, Juristic persons criminal liability

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Statutory interpretation - Second Circuit holds that health care funds lack standing to sue tobacco companies under RICO - Laborers Local 17 Health & Benefit Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc
• Abstracts: Sticks and carrots spur fuller Y2K disclosures. IRDA offers protection - with limits; the Year 2000 IRDA is intended to reduce liability, but since it doesn't cover all the bases, companies still need a good plan
• Abstracts: Mentoring programs boost law firm loyalty; often, having a good role model is the most important factor in associate satisfaction
• Abstracts: Taxman at poor's door; lawyers' help proves crucial for migrants when IRS audits. Tackling the Web's privacy problems
• Abstracts: Antitrust law; IP owners' refusals to deal. In ruling on antitrust, does Fed. Circuit overstep? Its exertion of jurisdiction over nonpatent issues puts district courts in bind over precedents

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.