DISCOVERY - PREJUDICIAL BRADY VIOLATION - EVIDENCE HELD BY HOSPITAL
People v. Uribe (C.A. 6th, 4/24/08, H030630) 08 C.D.O.S. 6069
Videotape of SART examination constituted Brady material and was in
constructive possession of prosecution. It was in the hands of a
private hospital which was nevertheless the designated entity for
SART exams. The hospital was acting on the government's behalf. The
video (which the appellate court viewed) was material and favorable to
the defense.
ENHANCEMENTS - FEDERAL - EXPLOSIVES IN COMMISSION OF FELONY
United States v. Ressam (U.S. Sup. Ct. 5/19/08, 07455) 08 C.D.O.S. 5976
Defendant who lied to customs officials about his nationality and
identity while carrying explosives, which he was planning to detonate
at LAX, was carrying an explosive "during the commission" of that
felony. The explosive did not have to be carried "in relation to" the
underlying felony, as the Ninth Circuit had held.
SENTENCING - MEANING OF "MAXIMUM TERM OF IMPRISONMENT"
United States v. Rodriguez (U.S. Sup. Ct. 5/19/08, 061646) 08
C.D.O.S. 5980
Term "maximum term of imprisonment" for qualifying "serious drug
offense" under Armed Career Criminal Act includes recidivist
enhancements. Ninth Circuit gets reversed again.
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY - SOLICITATION/PANDERING - CONSTITUTIONALITY
United States v. Williams (U.S. Sup. Ct. 5/19/08, 06694) 08 C.D.O.S.
5989
Pandering or solicitation of child pornography, which does not
require possession of images of real children, is not overbroad or
impermissibly vague under Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause. Souter
and Ginsburg dissent.
SENTENCING - DRUGS CARRIED BY OTHERS
United States v. Dallman (9th Cir. 5/19/08, 05-30349) 08 C.D.O.S. 6006
Defendant's sentence could be based on drugs carried by co-defendants
when all three defendants were carrying bags of marijuana and walking
together.
CIVIL RIGHTS - RESISTING CONVICTION NO BAR TO SUIT BASED ON USE OF
DEADLY FORCE
Yount v. City of Sacramento (Ca. Sup. Ct., 5/19/08, S139762) 08
C.D.O.S. 6020
Claim that officer was not entitled to use deadly force was not
barred by plaintiff's no-contest plea to violating Penal Code section
148 under Heck v. Humphrey (1994) 512 U.S. 477 (barring 1983 action
that implies invalidity of criminal conviction).
