Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> JURIST - The Paper Chase

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Legal News

: JURIST - The Paper Chase

Supreme Court hears plea agreement, RICO cases

By Bernard Hibbitts (editor) and University of Pittsburgh School of Law students.

ADVERTISEMENTS

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in two cases. In Puckett v. United States, the Court heard arguments on whether a defendant's claim, not raised at trial, that the prosecution breached a plea agreement is reviewable on appeal according to the plain-error standard under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the claim was governed by plain-error review and found no reversible error. Counsel for the petitioner argued that Puckett "has been prejudiced by the government's breach." Counsel for the government argued:that the plain-error standard does apply to forfeited claims that a plea agreement has been breached, that the Olano framework should be followed, and that one component of the plain-error showing in this context should require a defendant who did not object to a breach in the district court to show a reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceeding was affected by the breach.In Boyle v. United States, the Court heard arguments on whether provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) require prosecutors to prove the existence of an "ascertainable structure beyond that inherent in the pattern of racketeering activity" in which an organization engages. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held without discussion that there is no such requirement. Counsel for the petitioner argued:To keep the elements apart, ensure their distinct consideration, and give the enterprise independent meaning, juries must be instructed, as in the Seventh Circuit and elsewhere, that an "enterprise" requires a structure separate from the commission of the predicate acts forming the pattern.Counsel for the government argued:An association-in-fact enterprise need not have an ascertainable structure distinct from the predicate act of racketeering committed by one of its associates, whatever that means. RICO's statutory text, its surrounding context, and this Court's construction of the statute show that RICO's definition of "enterprise" is broad and contains no such limitation.

Full post as published by JURIST - The Paper Chase on January 14, 2009 (boomark / email).

Related Law Blog Posts

Search Blog Directory:

A high profile plea
AP reports: A plea agreement has been reached in a death-penalty case that may have led to the ouster of the former U.S. Attorney in Arizona. Jose Rios Rico pleaded guilty Tuesday to murder, drug and weapons charges in the February 2003 slaying of Angela Pinkerton...

Oral argument recording available in Rubio v. State
An audio recording of this morning's oral argument in Rubio v. State is now available at the Nevada Supreme Court's webside. The case concerns a claim by the appellant that she should have been allowed to withdraw her plea of guilty where her plea agreement was not in Spanish and she did not speak English, her attorney did not personally review her plea agreement with her but instead relied upon a court interpreter to give advice about the plea agreement, and the interpreter provided erroneous advice about the immigration consequences of the plea.

Miller-El Case Ends With Plea Agreement
There is more than a little irony in the fact that the Thomas Miller-El case settled with a plea agreement on the same day that the Supreme Court revisited race and the death penalty in Snyder v...

"Supreme Court Hears Environmental, Employment Discrimination Cases"
"Supreme Court Hears Environmental, Employment Discrimination Cases": law.com's Tony Mauro has this report.

Al-Arian: Promise not to Subpoena Must be Explicit in Plea Agreement
In U.S. v. Al-Arian, No. 06-16008 (Jan. 25, 2008), the Court held that when a plea agreement contains no agreement providing that a defendant is immune from a future grand jury subpoena, the plea agreement does not prevent the government from subpoenaing the defendant to testify before a grand jury...

Recommended Sentence in Plea Agreement Doesn't Prevent Reduction
US v. Dews: This is the first of two recent cases dealing with issues arising from the retroactive application of the amended crack Guidelines. In this case (actually a pair of consolidated cases), the defendants both pleaded guilty via a plea agreement under FRCrP 11(e)(1)(C)...

Search Blog Directory: