« Report on the NJ Blakely arguments | Main | Scalia speaks out on Roper »
March 14, 2005
Quick tour around the blogsphere
A relatively quiet afternoon means time to find and read some blog posts of note:
- Grits for Breakfast has collected links here to a "slew of sentencing reform bills in play at the Texas Legislature."
- SCOTUSblog has collected links here to all the of briefs in the prison/religion case, Cutter v. Wilkinson, to be argued next Monday in the Supreme Court.
- From the Booker world, the Third Circuit Blog has this post spotlighting how broad the Third Circuit's remand approach extends and the Defense Newsletter Blog has this post detailing how the Eleventh Circuit in US v. Frye had to amend its opinion to rely on an appeal waiver rather than the defendant's admission to affirm a sentence with potential Blakely/Booker problems.
March 14, 2005 at 06:45 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d8347384e069e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Quick tour around the blogsphere:
Comments
I am a defense attorney practicing in the 11CTA. Recently I filed for cert in a case where the 11 Cir. refused to allow me to supplement the appeal with a Blakely issue when the initial brief was filed prior to Blakely. The Solicitor General filed a memorandum stating that GRV was appropriate. Several weeks later I received a call from a clerk at the S.Ct. letting me know that the Solicitor General wanted to file a supplemental response & wondering if I wanted the case distributed or held back. According to the clerk the Solicitor General had selected 5 cases from the 11th Cir. to file a response in becuase of the 11th Cir. practice of prohibiting a Rule 28(j) brief on the issue....the assistant SG has not returned my call to try to find out what position they are taking. Does anyone have a prediction on what position the SG will take on this? I am arguing that US v. Levy 391 F.3d 327 is wrongly decided.
Posted by: Lynn Fant | Mar 22, 2005 9:00:59 AM
I am a defense attorney practicing in the 11CTA. Recently I filed for cert in a case where the 11 Cir. refused to allow me to supplement the appeal with a Blakely issue when the initial brief was filed prior to Blakely. The Solicitor General filed a memorandum stating that GRV was appropriate. Several weeks later I received a call from a clerk at the S.Ct. letting me know that the Solicitor General wanted to file a supplemental response & wondering if I wanted the case distributed or held back. According to the clerk the Solicitor General had selected 5 cases from the 11th Cir. to file a response in becuase of the 11th Cir. practice of prohibiting a Rule 28(j) brief on the issue....the assistant SG has not returned my call to try to find out what position they are taking. Does anyone have a prediction on what position the SG will take on this? I am arguing that US v. Levy 391 F.3d 327 is wrongly decided.
Posted by: Lynn Fant | Mar 22, 2005 9:01:39 AM
