FAMM Legal Briefs

7/29/08

FAMM and NACDL file amicus brief in Burgess v. United States

FAMM and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) today filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief in support of petitioner Keith Lavon Burgess in a case that explores a small but significant question about how to interpret a federal statute using the "rule of lenity" in favor of the defendant.

The brief was authored by Kevin B. Huff and Gregory G. Rapawy, of the law firm Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel, in Washington, D.C.; Pamela Harris, co-chair, NACDL amicus committee in Washington, D.C.; Peter Goldberger, attorney and FAMM litigation advisory board member, in Ardmore, Pennsylvania and Mary Price, vice president and general counsel, FAMM. Read more

7/26/07

FAMM files amicus brief in U.S. Supreme Court federal sentencing guidelines case

On July 26, FAMM filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief in Gall v. United States, No. 06-7949, the latest in a series of cases that outline to what extent judges must adhere to the federal sentencing guidelines. FAMM is grateful to Gregory Poe, of Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck & Untereiner in Washington, D.C. and Brian M. Willen, of Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw, in New York, for representing FAMM in Gall. Read more

4/19/07

Federal halfway house placement addressed in Muniz v. Sabol amicus

The legal battle over federal halfway house placement continues. FAMM, with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Massachusetts Criminal Justice Act Board have weighed in on the latest case with an amicus brief in the First Circuit in Muniz v. Sabol. Read more

12/18/06

FAMM files amicus brief in Supreme Court Claiborne and Rita cases

The Court will consider this issue in two cases: Claiborne v. U.S., No. 06-5618, in which a below-guideline sentence was reversed by the appeals court as “unreasonable,” and Rita v. U.S., No. 06-5754, in which a within-guideline sentence was affirmed by the appeals court. If the Court decides that the guidelines are presumptively reasonable, the advisory guidelines will be advisory in name only, functioning much like the mandatory guidelines that Booker made unconstitutional. Read more

6/23/06

FAMM joins with NACDL in the case of Toledo-Flores v. United States;

Case to resolve definition of drug-trafficking crime

In a case before the U.S. Supreme Court that turns on the definition of a drug-trafficking crime, FAMM has joined the National Association of Federal Defenders (NAFD) in filing an amicus brief. Toledo-Flores v. United States, No. 05-7664. Read more

2/8/06

FAMM files second amicus brief on federal good time issue

On February 8, 2006, FAMM, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and all 73 federal public and community defenders filed a friend of the court brief in Mujahid v. Daniels, No 05-8678. Like the petitioners in O’Donald v. Johns and Moreland v. BOP, Sabil Mujahid is asking the court to review a decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the way the federal Bureau of Prisons calculates good conduct credit. FAMM and fellow amici are supporting that request. Read more

1/19/06

FAMM files friend of the Court brief in Supreme Court on good time issue

On January 18, 2006, FAMM filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to review O’ Donald v. Johns, No. 05-8504, because the case, challenging the Bureau of Prisons’ calculation of good time credit, “presents a question of great practical and legal significance.”

Archives:

2005