Federal Defenders of New York Blog
Serving the Second Circuit and the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York
In the first opinion of its kind, SDNY Judge William A. Pauley suppressed evidence obtained through the warrantless use of a stingray device.
You can read Judge Pauley’s opinion in United States v. Lambis here. The New York Times has coverage of the case here.
…
The Second Circuit did not issue any decisions in criminal matters today.…
“Serious nonhomicide crimes may be devastating in their harm[,] but in terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the public, they cannot be compared to murder in their severity and irreovocability.” So said the Second Circuit today in United States v. Brown, No. 13-1706-cr (June 14, 2016) (quoting the Supreme Court decision in Graham v. Flordia, 560 U.S. 48, 69 (2010)), in remanding a 60-year sentence for production of child pornography on procedural grounds that look awfully substantive. The opinion contains must-use language for advocates at sentencing for a less-than-extreme sentence in any non-homicide case.
The majority opinion (written by J. Pooler with J. Sack signing on) found that the District Court (J. Sharpe, NDNY) may have misunderstood certain facts in imposing a virtual life sentence for photographing and disseminating sexual images of three young girls and possessing thousands of other images of …
No criminal cases were decided by the Circuit today.
But there is an interesting civil case resulting from the plaintiff’s arrest by NYPD detectives, on charges that were later dismissed. The plaintiff brought a civil suit against the defendants — several named NYPD detectives — under 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 .
The case is Figueroa v. Mazza et al., No. 14-4116-cv (2d Cir. June 3, 2016) (Circuit Judges: Kearse, Walker, and Cabranes; Judge Kearse dissents from part of the opinion).
In the plaintiff’s civil suit under 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 and state law, he raised the following claims against the detectives: (1) false arrest, (2) excessive force, (3) assault, (4) failure to intervene (because the detectives did not stop an unidentified police officer from beating him as he sat in a police car), and (5) unlawful entry.
Of interest is Circuit’s discussion of the unlawful entry claim because it involves a …
The Court did not issue any decisions in criminal cases today.
…
The Second Circuit did not issue any criminal decisions today.…
Nothing relevant from the Second Circuit today.…
In United States v. Paredes, 15-Cr-436, EDNY Judge Jack B. Weinstein held that a defendant’s conviction for violating New York Vehicle and Traffic Law Section 1192.1, a violation and not a crime, does not result in criminal history points, thereby allowing the defendant to qualify for safety valve relief from a mandatory minimum sentence. Judge Weinstein concluded that the Sentencing Commission could not have intended to include VTL 1192.1 – New York’s Driving While Ability Impaired statute – because the statue “is a light, noncriminal offense with mens rea squeezed out of it.” Opinion at 14. You can read Judge Weinstein’s opinion here. The New York Law Journal has coverage here. Mr. Paredes was represented by Len Kamdang of the Federal Defenders of New York.
In United State v Henry, 15-Cr-179, SDNY Judge Paul A. Crotty imposed a sentence of 36 months in a case in …
…
There are no criminal decisions from the Court of Appeals today.
We hope everyone had a happy Mother’s Day!…
In United States v. Jimenez, 15-1624, the Circuit affirmed the District Court’s denial of a reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582. The Circuit held that when the District Court stated that a lower sentence was “foreclose[d]” by the defendant’s participation in four murders, it meant that the original sentence was the minimum sentence necessary in light of Jimenez’s conduct and that the facts of the case did not provide a basis for granting a sentence reduction.…