Add to ORKGThis note will first explain the facts of Custis\u27 case and then discuss the background of the Armed Career Criminal Act. The ACCA discussion will be followed by a review of the procedural history and the Supreme Court\u27s analysis of Custis\u27 case. The note will then offer a critique of the Court\u27s interpretation of the language and legislative intent behind the ACCA. Finally, the note will conclude that the Custis decision illustrates increasing judicial effort to curtail the availability of post-conviction relief formerly available to criminal defendants
The Court has struggled for well over a century with the issue of who has final authority to define ...
In January 2015, the Supreme Court directed the parties to brief and argue an additional question in...
(Excerpt) This Article analyzes each of those decisions and, by way of two hypothetical cases, addre...
This note will first explain the facts of Custis\u27 case and then discuss the background of the Arm...
Johnson v. United States held that the “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) is ...
The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) provides a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence in federal p...
Near the end of the Supreme Court\u27s 2012-2013 term, the Court decided Descamps v. United States, ...
Two years ago, in Johnson v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the so-called “residual clau...
Confusion reigns in federal courts over whether crimes qualify as “violent felonies” for purposes of...
Occasionally, criminals correctly interpret the law while courts err. Litigation pursuant to the fed...
This Comment explores the U.S. Supreme Court’s attempt to create a judicial standard for defining th...
The Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA) enables the federal government to help state authoritie...
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court handed down a decision many years in the making—Johnson v. Unite...
The Maine Court had good reason to reject Custis. Between 1967 when Burgett announced the rule that ...
On March 30, 2017, in United States v. King, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circui...
The Court has struggled for well over a century with the issue of who has final authority to define ...
In January 2015, the Supreme Court directed the parties to brief and argue an additional question in...
(Excerpt) This Article analyzes each of those decisions and, by way of two hypothetical cases, addre...
This note will first explain the facts of Custis\u27 case and then discuss the background of the Arm...
Johnson v. United States held that the “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) is ...
The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) provides a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence in federal p...
Near the end of the Supreme Court\u27s 2012-2013 term, the Court decided Descamps v. United States, ...
Two years ago, in Johnson v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the so-called “residual clau...
Confusion reigns in federal courts over whether crimes qualify as “violent felonies” for purposes of...
Occasionally, criminals correctly interpret the law while courts err. Litigation pursuant to the fed...
This Comment explores the U.S. Supreme Court’s attempt to create a judicial standard for defining th...
The Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA) enables the federal government to help state authoritie...
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court handed down a decision many years in the making—Johnson v. Unite...
The Maine Court had good reason to reject Custis. Between 1967 when Burgett announced the rule that ...
On March 30, 2017, in United States v. King, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circui...
The Court has struggled for well over a century with the issue of who has final authority to define ...
In January 2015, the Supreme Court directed the parties to brief and argue an additional question in...
(Excerpt) This Article analyzes each of those decisions and, by way of two hypothetical cases, addre...